PURPOSE: To present a selected case series of different phenotypes of the normal outer plexiform layer (OPL) visualized by optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: Five cases were selected to represent the spectrum of appearances of the OPL in this case series. Categorical descriptions of each manifestation were then developed. Additional SD-OCT scans were obtained from a normal volunteer to further support the hypothesis. RESULTS: The inner one-third of the OPL typically appears hyperreflective on OCT, while the outer two-thirds (Henle fiber layer) may have a more varied appearance. Six different phenotypes of Henle fiber layer reflectivity were noted in this series, and classified as: bright, columnar, dentate, delimited, indistinct, and dark. The brightness of the Henle fiber layer appears to depend on the geometric angle between the OCT light beam and the axonal fibers in this portion of the OPL. This angle appears to be a function of the natural orientation of the Henle fiber layer tissue (θN), the existence of subretinal pathology that alters the angle of the neurosensory retina (θ(P)), and the tilt angle of the tissue on the B-scan (θ(T)) due to decentered OCT acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: Since accurate interpretation of the OPL/ONL boundary is of vital importance to study the thickness of ONL, location of cystoid lesions, hyperreflective crescents over drusen, et al., our case series may aid better understanding of the OPL appearance in SD-OCT. In the absence of clear delineation, it may be most correct to refer to indistinct OPL and ONL together as the photoreceptor nuclear axonal complex (PNAC).
PURPOSE: To present a selected case series of different phenotypes of the normal outer plexiform layer (OPL) visualized by optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS: Five cases were selected to represent the spectrum of appearances of the OPL in this case series. Categorical descriptions of each manifestation were then developed. Additional SD-OCT scans were obtained from a normal volunteer to further support the hypothesis. RESULTS: The inner one-third of the OPL typically appears hyperreflective on OCT, while the outer two-thirds (Henle fiber layer) may have a more varied appearance. Six different phenotypes of Henle fiber layer reflectivity were noted in this series, and classified as: bright, columnar, dentate, delimited, indistinct, and dark. The brightness of the Henle fiber layer appears to depend on the geometric angle between the OCT light beam and the axonal fibers in this portion of the OPL. This angle appears to be a function of the natural orientation of the Henle fiber layer tissue (θN), the existence of subretinal pathology that alters the angle of the neurosensory retina (θ(P)), and the tilt angle of the tissue on the B-scan (θ(T)) due to decentered OCT acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: Since accurate interpretation of the OPL/ONL boundary is of vital importance to study the thickness of ONL, location of cystoid lesions, hyperreflective crescents over drusen, et al., our case series may aid better understanding of the OPL appearance in SD-OCT. In the absence of clear delineation, it may be most correct to refer to indistinct OPL and ONL together as the photoreceptor nuclear axonal complex (PNAC).
Authors: Vivek J Srinivasan; Bryan K Monson; Maciej Wojtkowski; Richard A Bilonick; Iwona Gorczynska; Royce Chen; Jay S Duker; Joel S Schuman; James G Fujimoto Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: C A Toth; D G Narayan; S A Boppart; M R Hee; J G Fujimoto; R Birngruber; C P Cain; C D DiCarlo; W P Roach Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 1997-11
Authors: Hiroshi Ishikawa; Daniel M Stein; Gadi Wollstein; Siobahn Beaton; James G Fujimoto; Joel S Schuman Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Shiv Saidha; Elias S Sotirchos; Mohamed A Ibrahim; Ciprian M Crainiceanu; Jeffrey M Gelfand; Yasir J Sepah; John N Ratchford; Jiwon Oh; Michaela A Seigo; Scott D Newsome; Laura J Balcer; Elliot M Frohman; Ari J Green; Quan D Nguyen; Peter A Calabresi Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Ahmet Murat Bagci; Mahnaz Shahidi; Rashid Ansari; Michael Blair; Norman Paul Blair; Ruth Zelkha Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: N Z Gregori; A M Berrocal; G Gregori; T G Murray; R W Knighton; H W Flynn; S Dubovy; C A Puliafito; P J Rosenfeld Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2008-11-19 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Brandon J Lujan; Austin Roorda; Jason A Croskrey; Adam M Dubis; Robert F Cooper; Jan-Kristine Bayabo; Jacque L Duncan; Bhavna J Antony; Joseph Carroll Journal: Retina Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Shane M Griffin; H Richard McDonald; Robert N Johnson; J Michael Jumper; Arthur D Fu; Emmett T Cunningham; Lee Kiang; Caleb C Ng; Brandon J Lujan Journal: Retina Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 3.975
Authors: Benjamin J Kim; David J Irwin; Delu Song; Ebenezer Daniel; Jennifer D Leveque; Aaishah R Raquib; Wei Pan; Gui-Shuang Ying; Tomas S Aleman; Joshua L Dunaief; Murray Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Timm Oberwahrenbrock; Maria Weinhold; Janine Mikolajczak; Hanna Zimmermann; Friedemann Paul; Ingeborg Beckers; Alexander U Brandt Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Timm Oberwahrenbrock; Ghislaine L Traber; Sebastian Lukas; Iñigo Gabilondo; Rachel Nolan; Christopher Songster; Lisanne Balk; Axel Petzold; Friedemann Paul; Pablo Villoslada; Alexander U Brandt; Ari J Green; Sven Schippling Journal: Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm Date: 2018-03-13
Authors: Andrew W Browne; Cosimo Arnesano; Narine Harutyunyan; Thien Khuu; Juan Carlos Martinez; Harvey A Pollack; David S Koos; Thomas C Lee; Scott E Fraser; Rex A Moats; Jennifer G Aparicio; David Cobrinik Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799