Purpose: The purpose was to establish the position of the fovea centralis to the optic nerve via en-face, near-infrared spectral domain optical coherence tomography (NIR-OCT) in healthy patients. This may shed light on physiological variability and be used for studying subtle cases of foveal ectopia in macular pathology and after retinal detachment. Methods: SD-OCT data of 890 healthy eyes were retrospectively analyzed. Exclusion criteria included axial myopia causing tilting of the optic disc, peripapillary atrophy >1/3 the width of the disc, macular images excluding greater than half of the optic disc, and patients unable to maintain vertical head positioning. Two independent reviewers measured the horizontal and vertical distance from the fovea to the optic disc center and optic disc diameter via cross-sectional and en-face scanning laser ophthalmoloscopy OCT imaging. Results: 890 eyes were included in the study. The right and left eyes differed in the horizontal distance from the fovea to the disc center (4359 vs. 4248 µm, P < 0.001) and vertical distance from the fovea to the disc center (464 µm vs. 647, P < 0.001). This corresponded to a smaller angle between the right and left eyes (6.07° vs. 8.67°, P < 0.001). Older age was associated with a larger horizontal (P = 0.008) and vertical distance (0.025). These differences persisted after correcting for axial length in the 487 patients with axial-length data. Conclusions: This study compares the position of the fovea centralis among individuals without macular pathology on a micron level basis. The significant variability between right and left eyes indicates that contralateral eye evaluation cannot be reliably used. Rather, true foveal ectopia requires assessments of preoperative and postoperative NIR-OCT scans. This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia. Translational Relevance: This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia.
Purpose: The purpose was to establish the position of the fovea centralis to the optic nerve via en-face, near-infrared spectral domain optical coherence tomography (NIR-OCT) in healthy patients. This may shed light on physiological variability and be used for studying subtle cases of foveal ectopia in macular pathology and after retinal detachment. Methods:SD-OCT data of 890 healthy eyes were retrospectively analyzed. Exclusion criteria included axial myopia causing tilting of the optic disc, peripapillary atrophy >1/3 the width of the disc, macular images excluding greater than half of the optic disc, and patients unable to maintain vertical head positioning. Two independent reviewers measured the horizontal and vertical distance from the fovea to the optic disc center and optic disc diameter via cross-sectional and en-face scanning laser ophthalmoloscopy OCT imaging. Results: 890 eyes were included in the study. The right and left eyes differed in the horizontal distance from the fovea to the disc center (4359 vs. 4248 µm, P < 0.001) and vertical distance from the fovea to the disc center (464 µm vs. 647, P < 0.001). This corresponded to a smaller angle between the right and left eyes (6.07° vs. 8.67°, P < 0.001). Older age was associated with a larger horizontal (P = 0.008) and vertical distance (0.025). These differences persisted after correcting for axial length in the 487 patients with axial-length data. Conclusions: This study compares the position of the fovea centralis among individuals without macular pathology on a micron level basis. The significant variability between right and left eyes indicates that contralateral eye evaluation cannot be reliably used. Rather, true foveal ectopia requires assessments of preoperative and postoperative NIR-OCT scans. This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia. Translational Relevance: This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia.
Authors: Andrea Giani; Marco Pellegrini; Alessandro Invernizzi; Mario Cigada; Giovanni Staurenghi Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-11-13 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Estefanía Cobos; Marcos J Rubio; Luis Arias; Jose M Caminal; Pere Garcia-Bru; Jaume Català; Sara Jordan; Maria Vidal; Laura Gutiérrez Journal: Retina Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Julia Lamparter; Richard A Russell; Haogang Zhu; Ryo Asaoka; Takehiro Yamashita; Tuan Ho; David F Garway-Heath Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Patrick J Murtagh; Kirk A Stephenson; Maedbh Rhatigan; Elizabeth M McElnea; Paul P Connell; David J Keegan Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 1.568
Authors: Giancarlo Sborgia; Alfredo Niro; Luigi Sborgia; Maria Oliva Grassi; Samuele Gigliola; Mario R Romano; Francesco Boscia; Alessandra Sborgia; Giovanni Alessio Journal: Int J Retina Vitreous Date: 2019-06-04
Authors: Mathijs A J van de Put; Fara Nayebi; Danna Croonen; Ilja M Nolte; Wouter J Japing; Johanna M M Hooymans; Leonoor I Los Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 3.240