| Literature DB >> 26649191 |
Guohong Tian1, Zhenxin Li2, Guixian Zhao2, Chaoyi Feng1, Mengwei Li1, Yongheng Huang1, Xinghuai Sun1.
Abstract
We evaluate a cohort of optic neuritis and neuromyelitis optica (NMO) spectrum disorders patients in a territory hospital in China. The peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and macular ganglion cell complex (GCC) were measured using spectral-domain OCT after 6 months of acute onset. The results showed that both the peripapillary RNFL and macular GCC were significantly thinner in all optic neuritis subtypes compared to controls. In addition, the recurrent optic neuritis and NMO groups showed more severe damage on the RNFL and GCC pattern.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26649191 PMCID: PMC4662994 DOI: 10.1155/2015/832784
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ophthalmol ISSN: 2090-004X Impact factor: 1.909
Demographics and clinical characteristics for MS-ON, R-ON, and NMO-ON group and control.
| Group | Patients | Age (year) | Course (month) | Bilateral% | Female% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS-ON | 62 | 30.47 ± 16.71 | 6.2 ± 3.0 | 33.3% | 58.1% |
| R-ON | 19 | 31.26 ± 11.20 | 20.0 ± 22.6 | 100% | 68.4% |
| NMO-ON | 37 | 40.54 ± 13.64 | 25.0 ± 33.4 | 34.7% | 83.8% |
| Control | 68 | 31.96 ± 13.78 | NA | NA | 64.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NA: not applicable; a: the statistical difference between NMO-ON and other groups; b: the statistical difference between MS-ON and other ON subtypes; NMO-ON and other groups; c: the statistical difference between R-ON group and other ON subtypes; d: the statistical difference between ON subtypes and control.
Peripapillary RNFL thicknesses (μm) for eyes of patients in each group.
| RNFL | MS-ON | R-ON | NMO-ON | Control |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | 79.12 ± 15.64 | 56.06 ± 9.83 | 63.94 ± 11.86 | 112.01 ± 10.93 |
| Temporal | 57.94 ± 14.57 | 48.37 ± 11.25 | 46.59 ± 12.10 | 139.93 ± 19.27 |
| Superior | 100.43 ± 22.51 | 80.74 ± 9.50 | 79.45 ± 16.47 | 120.43 ± 30.71 |
| Nasal | 59.84 ± 17.59 | 48.37 ± 8.90 | 48.91 ± 14.08 | 81.28 ± 13.05 |
| Inferior | 98.29 ± 21.57 | 82.76 ± 17.87 | 80.82 ± 17.40 | 141.76 ± 20.19 |
Repeated measures ANOVA of multiple comparisons of each group.
| ( | ( | Mean difference ( | Std. error | Sig. | 95% confidence interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower bound | Upper bound | |||||
| MS-ON | R-ON | 14.087 | 3.558 | .000 | 7.066 | 21.108 |
| NMO-ON | 10.998 | 3.336 | .001 | 4.415 | 17.581 | |
| Control | −32.795 | 2.312 | .000 | −37.358 | −28.232 | |
| R-ON | NMO-ON | −3.089 | 4.278 | .471 | −11.531 | 5.353 |
| Control | −46.882 | 3.547 | .000 | −53.881 | −39.882 | |
| NMO-ON | Control | −43.793 | 3.309 | .000 | −50.322 | −37.263 |
The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Figure 1The boxplot analysis representing the macular GCC thickness in MS-ON, R-ON, NMO-ON, and control group. Mean values and 5% and 95% percentiles are shown. The difference between the 4 groups was statistically significant (P < 0.001), whereas there was no significant difference between R-ON and NMO-ON group (P = 0.725).
Figure 2The fundus photograph (a) together with the corresponding macular GCC (b) and RNFL (c) measurements in MS-ON (A), R-ON (B), and NMO-ON (C) groups are showed, respectively.