Hyung Bin Lim1,2, Yong Il Shin1, Min Woo Lee1,3, Gi Seok Park1, Jung Yeul Kim1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Type 2 diabetes is expected to accelerate age-related peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) loss, but limited information on the rate of reduction in pRNFL thicknesses in patients with type 2 diabetes is available. OBJECTIVE: To investigate longitudinal changes in pRNFL thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without diabetic retinopathy (DR). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 164 eyes of 63 healthy individuals and 101 patients with type 2 diabetes (49 patients without DR [non-DR group] and 52 patients with mild to moderate nonproliferative DR [NPDR group]) were enrolled in this prospective, longitudinal, observational study from January 2, 2013, through February 27, 2015. Participants were followed up for 3 years, and the peripapillary mean and sector RNFL thicknesses were measured at 1-year intervals. The mean rate of pRNFL loss was estimated using a linear mixed model and compared among the 3 groups. Follow-up was completed on March 16, 2018, and data were analyzed from April 2 through July 27, 2018. EXPOSURE: Type 2 diabetes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The rate of reduction in pRNFL thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 164 participants (88 women [53.7%]; mean [SD] age, 58.2 [8.7] years) were included in the study analysis. The mean (SD) age of the control group was 56.5 (9.3) years (39 women [61.9%]); the non-DR group, 59.1 (9.4) years (26 women [53.1%]); and the NPDR group, 59.4 (11.0) years (23 women [44.2%]). Mean (SD) duration of type 2 diabetes was 7.1 (4.4) years in the non-DR group and 13.2 (8.4) years in the NPDR group. The baseline mean (SD) pRNFL thickness was 96.2 (11.0) μm in the control group, 93.5 (6.4) μm in the non-DR group, and 90.4 (7.9) μm in the NPDR group. During 3 years of follow-up, these values decreased to 95.0 (9.2) μm in the control group, 90.3 (6.4) in the non-DR group, and 86.6 (7.9) μm in the NPDR group. In a linear mixed model, the estimated mean pRNFL loss was -0.92 μm/y in the non-DR group (P < .001) and -1.16 μm/y in the NPDR group (P < .001), which was 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.1-14.8; P = .003) and 3.3-fold (95% CI, 1.4-18.0; P < .001) greater, respectively, than that of the control group (-0.35 μm/y; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Progressive reduction of pRNFL thickness was observed in healthy controls and patients with type 2 diabetes without and with DR; however, type 2 diabetes was associated with a greater loss of pRNFL regardless of whether DR was present. These findings suggest that pRNFL loss may occur in people with type 2 diabetes even in the absence of DR progression.
IMPORTANCE: Type 2 diabetes is expected to accelerate age-related peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) loss, but limited information on the rate of reduction in pRNFL thicknesses in patients with type 2 diabetes is available. OBJECTIVE: To investigate longitudinal changes in pRNFL thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without diabetic retinopathy (DR). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 164 eyes of 63 healthy individuals and 101 patients with type 2 diabetes (49 patients without DR [non-DR group] and 52 patients with mild to moderate nonproliferative DR [NPDR group]) were enrolled in this prospective, longitudinal, observational study from January 2, 2013, through February 27, 2015. Participants were followed up for 3 years, and the peripapillary mean and sector RNFL thicknesses were measured at 1-year intervals. The mean rate of pRNFL loss was estimated using a linear mixed model and compared among the 3 groups. Follow-up was completed on March 16, 2018, and data were analyzed from April 2 through July 27, 2018. EXPOSURE: Type 2 diabetes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The rate of reduction in pRNFL thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 164 participants (88 women [53.7%]; mean [SD] age, 58.2 [8.7] years) were included in the study analysis. The mean (SD) age of the control group was 56.5 (9.3) years (39 women [61.9%]); the non-DR group, 59.1 (9.4) years (26 women [53.1%]); and the NPDR group, 59.4 (11.0) years (23 women [44.2%]). Mean (SD) duration of type 2 diabetes was 7.1 (4.4) years in the non-DR group and 13.2 (8.4) years in the NPDR group. The baseline mean (SD) pRNFL thickness was 96.2 (11.0) μm in the control group, 93.5 (6.4) μm in the non-DR group, and 90.4 (7.9) μm in the NPDR group. During 3 years of follow-up, these values decreased to 95.0 (9.2) μm in the control group, 90.3 (6.4) in the non-DR group, and 86.6 (7.9) μm in the NPDR group. In a linear mixed model, the estimated mean pRNFL loss was -0.92 μm/y in the non-DR group (P < .001) and -1.16 μm/y in the NPDR group (P < .001), which was 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.1-14.8; P = .003) and 3.3-fold (95% CI, 1.4-18.0; P < .001) greater, respectively, than that of the control group (-0.35 μm/y; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Progressive reduction of pRNFL thickness was observed in healthy controls and patients with type 2 diabetes without and with DR; however, type 2 diabetes was associated with a greater loss of pRNFL regardless of whether DR was present. These findings suggest that pRNFL loss may occur in people with type 2 diabetes even in the absence of DR progression.
Authors: Ziqi Tang; Ming Yan Chan; Wai Yin Leung; Ho Yeung Wong; Ching Man Ng; Victor T T Chan; Raymond Wong; Jerry Lok; Simon Szeto; Jason C K Chan; Clement C Tham; Tien Y Wong; Carol Y Cheung Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Roomasa Channa; Kyungmoo Lee; Kristen A Staggers; Nitish Mehta; Sidra Zafar; Jie Gao; Benjamin J Frankfort; Sharon Y L Chua; Anthony P Khawaja; Paul J Foster; Praveen J Patel; Charles G Minard; Chris Amos; Michael D Abramoff Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 3.240