| Literature DB >> 32821496 |
Moussa A Zouache1, Giuliana Silvestri2, Winfried M Amoaku3, Vittorio Silvestri4, William C Hubbard1, Christian Pappas1, Stephen Akafo5, Seth Lartey6, Rebecca R Mastey7, Joseph Carroll7, Gregory S Hageman1.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to characterize foveal pit morphology in an African (Ghanaian) population, to compare it to that of a Caucasian group and to determine if it varied with age in the two populations.Entities:
Keywords: anatomy; fovea; macula; optical coherence tomography; retina
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32821496 PMCID: PMC7401974 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.5.24
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol ISSN: 2164-2591 Impact factor: 3.283
Figure 1.(a) Schematic of the foveal pit diameter, depth and slope interpolated from an SD-OCT B-scan centered on the fovea recorded in a Caucasian individual. Points A and C represent the rim of the foveal pit. Point B corresponds to the point where the slope of the pit is maximal. (b) B-scans taken from Ghanaian (left column) and Caucasian (right column) individuals with foveal pit (b) depth, (c) diameter, (d) maximal slope, and (e) volume that were closest to the population means.
Baseline Demographics of Caucasians and Ghanaians Included in this Study
| Demographic | Caucasians ( | Ghanaians ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Mean (SD) | 61.9 (11.5) | 65.1 (9.4) | 0.151 |
| Range | 41-85 | 45-82 | |
|
| |||
| Females | 28 | 54 | 0.3 |
| Males | 9 | 30 | |
|
| |||
| OD | 37 (19) | 63 (41) | - |
| OS | 37 (18) | 61 (43) |
Welsh's t-test, t = 1.47, CI = -1.14 to 7.47.
X2 = 1.05.
Coefficients of the Multilevel Linear Regressions and Results of the ANOVAs Assessing the Association Among Foveal Pit Depth, Diameter, Slope, Volume, Age, and Sex Within and Between Ethnic Groups
| Ghanaians | Caucasians | Ghanaians vs. Caucasians | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Sex | Sex | Ethnicity | |||||||
| Intercept | (Male) | Age | Intercept | (Male) | Age | Intercept | (Male) | Age | (Ghanaian) | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Coefficient | 0.14 | 7.0 × 10−3 | −4.8 × 10−4 | 0.12 | −0.01 | −1.5 × 10−4 | 0.13 | 0.002 | −3.7 × 10−4 | 5.9 × 10−3 |
| Standard error | 1.8 × 10−2 | 5.3 × 10−3 | 2.7 × 10−4 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 4 × 10−4 | 0.014 | 4.7 × 10−3 | 2.2 × 10−4 | 4.7 × 10−3 |
| Regression | <0.001 | 0.19 | 0.08 | <0.001 | 0.26 | 0.69 | <0.001 | 0.6 | 0.09 | 0.21 |
| R2 (adjusted) | 0.03 | −0.005 | 0.009 | |||||||
| ANOVA | - | 0.19 | 0.12 | - | 0.26 | 0.5 | - | 0.62 | 0.15 | 0.19 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Coefficient | 2.81 | −0.29 | −9.2 × 10−3 | 1.75 | −0.36 | 0.003 | 2.2 | −0.31 | −4.4 × 10−3 | 0.29 |
| Standard error | 0.19 | 0.057 | 0.0029 | 0.18 | 0.08 | 0.003 | 0.14 | 0.048 | 2.2 × 10−3 | 0.05 |
| | <0.001 | 3.78 × 10−6 | 0.002 | <0.001 | 2.89 × 10−5 | 0.25 | <0.001 | 3.28 × 10−9 | 0.049 | 2.1 × 10−8 |
| R2 (adjusted) | 0.32 | 0.37 | 0.38 | |||||||
| ANOVA | - | 3.78 × 10−6 | 1.1 × 10−4 | - | 2.89 × 10−5 | 0.9 | - | 3.3 × 10−9 | 0.015 | 2.42 × 10−7 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Coefficient | 10.24 | 2.26 | −0.0054 | 13.37 | 1.05 | −0.03 | 12.2 | 1.95 | −0.007 | −1.05 |
| Standard error | 1.80 | 0.54 | 0.028 | 2.49 | 1.06 | 0.04 | 1.44 | 0.49 | 0.023 | 0.49 |
| | <0.001 | 7.4 × 10−5 | 0.85 | <0.001 | 0.33 | 0.42 | <0.001 | 0.036 | 0.44 | 0.036 |
| R2 (adjusted) | 0.16 | −0.019 | 0.12 | |||||||
| ANOVA | - | 7.4 × 10−5 | 0.6 | - | 0.33 | 0.55 | - | 1.16 × 10−4 | 0.77 | 0.076 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Coefficient | 0.19 | −0.036 | −0.0012 | 0.08 | −0.04 | 1.4 × 10−4 | 0.13 | −0.033 | −6.8 × 10−4 | 0.03 |
| Standard error | 0.03 | 0.009 | 4.5 × 10−4 | 0.025 | 0.01 | 1.4 × 10−4 | 0.02 | 0.007 | 3.3 × 10−4 | 0.007 |
| | <0.001 | 7.0 × 10−4 | 0.0098 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.73 | <0.001 | 1.03 × 10−5 | 0.0412 | 2.23 × 10−5 |
| R2 (adjusted) | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.25 | |||||||
| ANOVA | - | 7.0 × 10−4 | 1.4 × 10−3 | - | 0.001 | 0.65 | - | 1.03 × 10−5 | 0.017 | 9.7 × 10−5 |
Figure 2.Scatter plots showing the variation of (a) foveal pit depth, (b) foveal pit diameter, (c) foveal pit slope, and (d) foveal pit volume with age and the P value for their association with age in 30 Ghanaian men (■) and 54 Ghanaian women (▲). The plain lines correspond to regression lines for Ghanaian men and women, which were calculated separately for men and women in (b) and (d).
Figure 3.Scatter plots showing the variation of (a) foveal pit depth, (b) foveal pit diameter, (c) foveal pit slope, and (d) foveal pit volume with age and the P value for their association with age in 37 Caucasians (▲) and 84 Ghanaians (■). The plain lines correspond to the regression lines for Caucasians and Ghanaians, which were generated by combining men and women in each ethnic group. They were calculated separately for Caucasians and Ghanaians in (b) and (d).
Results of the Monte-Carlo Simulations Carried Out to Assess the Effect of the Lack of Correction for Axial Length on Associations Between Foveal Pit Diameter and Age, Sex, or Ethnicity
| Ghanaians | Caucasians | Ghanaians vs. Caucasians | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Sex | Sex | Ethnicity | ||||
| (Male) | Age | (Male) | Age | (Male) | Age | (Ghanaian) | |
|
| 3.78 × 10−6 | 1.1 × 10−4 | 2.89 × 10−5 | 0.9 | 3.3 × 10−9 | 0.015 | 2.42 × 10−7 |
| Min | 8.2 × 10−9 | 3.06 × 10−7 | 4.1 × 10−8 | 0.02 | 2.0 × 10−11 | 1.79 × 10−5 | 8.9 × 10−10 |
| Max | 0.03 | 0.17 | 0.08 | 0.99 | 0.002 | 0.89 | 0.01 |
| Mean | 3.2 × 10−4 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.65 | 4.2 × 10−6 | 0.07 | 6.7 × 10−5 |
| % | 100% | 99.6% | >99.9% | 0.1% | 100% | 58% | 100% |
A simulated P value (denoted ) was produced for each of the 10,000 simulations. The table indicates the proportion of simulations for which the associations remained significant.