Glenn Yiu1, Stephanie J Chiu2, Philip A Petrou3, Sandra Stinnett4, Neeru Sarin4, Sina Farsiu5, Emily Y Chew3, Wai T Wong3, Cynthia A Toth6. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 6. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: cynthia.toth@duke.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare choroidal thickness in patients with intermediate or advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and control subjects using enhanced-depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study of 325 eyes from 164 subjects who underwent EDI-OCT for the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) 2 Ancillary Spectral Domain OCT study. METHODS: Choroidal thickness was measured by semi-automated segmentation of EDI-OCT images from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea. Multivariate linear regression was used to evaluate the association of subfoveal choroidal thickness or average choroidal thickness across the central 3-mm segment with systemic and ocular variables. Choroidal thickness measurements were compared between eyes with no AMD (n = 154) (ie, controls), intermediate AMD (n = 109), and advanced AMD (n = 62). RESULTS: Both subfoveal and average choroidal thicknesses were associated with age (P < .001) and refractive error (P < .001), but not other variables tested. Mean average choroidal thickness was significantly reduced in advanced AMD as compared with control eyes (P = .008), with no significant difference between advanced and intermediate AMD eyes (P = .152) or between intermediate AMD and control eyes (P = .098). Choroidal thinning was also noted from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea when comparing advanced AMD with control eyes (P < .05 at all 0.5 mm interval locations). After adjustment for age and refractive error, however, there was no significant difference in subfoveal (P = .675) or average choroidal thickness (P = .746) across all 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for age and refractive error, central choroidal thickness may not be significantly influenced by AMD status based on AREDS categorization.
PURPOSE: To compare choroidal thickness in patients with intermediate or advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and control subjects using enhanced-depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study of 325 eyes from 164 subjects who underwent EDI-OCT for the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) 2 Ancillary Spectral Domain OCT study. METHODS: Choroidal thickness was measured by semi-automated segmentation of EDI-OCT images from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea. Multivariate linear regression was used to evaluate the association of subfoveal choroidal thickness or average choroidal thickness across the central 3-mm segment with systemic and ocular variables. Choroidal thickness measurements were compared between eyes with no AMD (n = 154) (ie, controls), intermediate AMD (n = 109), and advanced AMD (n = 62). RESULTS: Both subfoveal and average choroidal thicknesses were associated with age (P < .001) and refractive error (P < .001), but not other variables tested. Mean average choroidal thickness was significantly reduced in advanced AMD as compared with control eyes (P = .008), with no significant difference between advanced and intermediate AMD eyes (P = .152) or between intermediate AMD and control eyes (P = .098). Choroidal thinning was also noted from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea when comparing advanced AMD with control eyes (P < .05 at all 0.5 mm interval locations). After adjustment for age and refractive error, however, there was no significant difference in subfoveal (P = .675) or average choroidal thickness (P = .746) across all 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for age and refractive error, central choroidal thickness may not be significantly influenced by AMD status based on AREDS categorization.
Authors: Siva Balasubramanian; Jianqin Lei; Muneeswar G Nittala; Swetha B Velaga; Jonathan Haines; Margaret A Pericak-Vance; Dwight Stambolian; SriniVas R Sadda Journal: Retina Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Elliott H Sohn; Miles J Flamme-Wiese; S Scott Whitmore; Grefachew Workalemahu; Alexander G Marneros; Erin A Boese; Young H Kwon; Kai Wang; Michael D Abramoff; Budd A Tucker; Edwin M Stone; Robert F Mullins Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Vivian S Vuong; Elad Moisseiev; David Cunefare; Sina Farsiu; Ala Moshiri; Glenn Yiu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Sophie C Lee; Steven Tran; Aana Amin; Lawrence S Morse; Ala Moshiri; Susanna S Park; Glenn Yiu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 5.258