| Literature DB >> 30233408 |
Maja Kostic1, Nathan M Bates1, Nebojsa T Milosevic2, Jing Tian1, William E Smiddy1, Wen-Hsiang Lee1, Gabor M Somfai3,4, William J Feuer1, Joyce C Shiffman1, Ajay E Kuriyan1, Ninel Z Gregori1, Sandra Pineda1, Delia Cabrera DeBuc1.
Abstract
In this study, we examined the relationship between the fractal dimension (FD), the morphology of the foveal avascular zone (FAZ) and the macular circulation in healthy controls and patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with and with no diabetic retinopathy (DR). Cross-sectional data of 47 subjects were analyzed from a 5-year longitudinal study using a multimodal optical imaging approach. Healthy eyes from nondiabetic volunteers (n = 12) were selected as controls. Eyes from patients with T2DM were selected and divided into two groups: diabetic subjects with mild DR (MDR group, n = 15) and subjects with DM but without DR (DM group, n = 20). Our results demonstrated a higher FD in the healthy group (mean, 1.42 ± 0.03) than in the DM and MDR groups (1.39 ± 0.02 and 1.35 ± 0.03, respectively). Also, a bigger perimeter, area, and roundness of the FAZ were found in MDR eyes. A significant difference in area and perimeter (p ≤ 0.005) was observed for the MDR group supporting the enlargement of the FAZ due to diabetic complications in the eye. A moderate positive correlation (p = 0.014, R2 = 43.8%) between the FD and blood flow rate (BFR) was only found in the healthy control group. The BFR calculations revealed the lowest values in the MDR group (0.98 ± 0.27 μl/s vs. 1.36 ± 0.86 μl/s and 1.36 ± 0.57 μl/sec in the MDR, DM, and healthy groups, respectively, p = 0.2). Our study suggests that the FD of the foveal vessel arborization could provide useful information to identify early morphological changes in the retina of patients with T2DM. Our results also indicate that the enlargement and asymmetry of the FAZ might be related to a lower BFR because of the DR onset and progression. Interestingly, due to the lack of FAZ symmetry observed in the DM and MDR eyes, it appears that the distribution of flow within the retinal vessels loses complexity as the vascular structures distributing the flow are not well described by fractal branching. Further research could determine how our approach may be used to aid the diagnosis of retinal neurodegeneration and vascular impairment at the early stage of DR.Entities:
Keywords: blood flow rate; diabetic retinopathy; foveal avascular zone; fractal analysis; fractal dimension
Year: 2018 PMID: 30233408 PMCID: PMC6134047 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.01233
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Study Participant Demographics.
| Number of patients (Male/Female) | 12 (3/9) | 20 (6/14) | 15 (8/7) |
| Number of Eyes (OD/OS) | 13 (5/8) | 28 (10/18) | 17 (9/8) |
| Mean age ± SD, years | 54.08 ± 7.71 | 52.64 ± 7.79 | 52.63 ± 5.79 |
Figure 1Sketch diagram of skeletonized box dimension (Dskel) obtained by the box-counting method.
Figure 2Box plots displaying the FD results. The middle 50% (mean and 95% CI) of the data groups are as follows: DM (1.3765–1.4105), MDR (1.3255–1.365), and Healthy (1.4015–1.447).
Figure 3Sample images used in the fractal analysis. Images in the left column are the composite nCPM images generated from the RFI system, while those in the right are their respective skeleton images that were used in the fractal analysis. Row (A) is from the healthy group, Row (B) from the DM group, and Row (C) from the MDR group. We note that the blood vessel types used in the analysis were the major arterial and venous trees.
Results of the FAZ characterization for all three groups (first three columns show the morphological parameters).
| Area (mm2) | 0.19 ± 0.05 | 0.21 ± 0.06 | 0.25 ± 0.06 | 0.26 | < | |
| Perimeter (mm) | 2.03 ± 0.24 | 2.16 ± 0.39 | 2.50 ± 0.41 | 0.29 | < | < |
| Roundness | 0.87 ± 0.07 | 0.84 ± 0.09 | 0.90 ± 0.06 | 0.21 | 0.31 |
The p-values of the Kruskal-Walls test are shown in the last three columns) with significant results in bold. Note that roundness as defined by Image J – represents how closely a region conforms to a circle.
Figure 4Box Plot displaying the BFR results obtained for the overall blood vessels in the three study groups. The middle 50% of the data groups are as follows: DM (0.89–1.42), MDR (0.809–1.17), and Healthy (0.85–1.868).
Linear regression results obtained for all three groups after analyzing the correlations between the FD and BFR. Significant results (p < 0.05) are highlighted in bold.
| Healthy | 0.04 | 0.45 | 0.03 | 0.31 | 0.04 | 0.44 | |||
| DM | ~0 | < 0.01 | 0.8 | ~0 | < 0.01 | 0.65 | ~0 | < 0.01 | 0.75 |
| MDR | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.58 | 0.03 | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.24 |
Results are presented as: Slope of linear regression, R.
Figure 5(A–E) Linear regression results obtained for the DM group of patients, which is the only group that displayed significance when comparing the BFR to the FAZ characteristics. Each figure is labeled with measured parameters. The line represents thel ine of best fit, of which the equation is displayed in the graph region. In all cases, the “y-axis” represents BFR in μl/s and the “x-axis” represents FAZ area in mm2. (A) BFR vs. FAZ area in veins (B) BFR vs. FAZ area in all vessels (C–E) BFR vs. FAZ Perimeter for arteries, veins, and all vessels, respectively. The R2 is the coefficient of determination, which compares the ratio of the average difference of the data point and the line of the best fit with that of the data point and the average “y” value.