| Literature DB >> 35446407 |
Yongqing Han1, Xiaogang Wang2, Gang Sun3, Jing Luo4, Xing Cao4, Pengyi Yin4, Renhe Yu5, Simin He5, Fang Yang5, Frank L Myers6, Liang Zhou4.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate microvascular abnormalities in the macula and peripapillary area in diabetic patients without clinical signs of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and compare them with healthy control eyes, using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35446407 PMCID: PMC9034707 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.11.4.20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol ISSN: 2164-2591 Impact factor: 3.048
Figure 1.Image processing procedure for the 3 × 3 mm macular scan (A–D) and 4.5 × 4.5 mm optic disc scan (E–H) in a left eye. (A) FAZ (inner circle) and the ring area where FD-300 is measured (the region between the inner and outer circle which is 300-µm-wide) in a combined SCP and DCP image. (B) The region where FD-300 is measured is marked as pink, and the vessel network is marked as green. (C) Skeletonized image of the parafoveal microvasculature in the superficial capillary plexus. (D) Binary vessel image for the vessel density analysis showing five different sectors (C = central, S = superior, N = nasal, I = inferior, T = temporal). (E) OCTA image of the RPCP in the peripapillary area. (F) Annulus area with an inner and outer ring diameter of 2 mm and 4 mm both centered on the center of the disc. The vessel network is marked as green, large vessels are marked as pink. (G) Skeletonized image of peripapillary microvasculature with large vessels being masked. (H) Binary vessel image for the vessel density analysis showing four different sectors (S = superior, N = nasal, I = inferior, T = temporal).
Demographic Characteristics of Diabetic Patients Without Clinical Signs of Diabetic Retinopathy and Healthy Control Individuals
| Normal Controls (52 Eyes, Mean ± SD) | Diabetic Eyes Without Clinical Signs of DR(49 Eyes, Mean ± SD) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | 50.37 ± 10.98 | 51.59 ± 10.99 | 0.627 |
| Sex | 0.337 | ||
| Male | 28 | 31 | |
| Female | 24 | 18 | |
| Duration of DM (y) | 5.82 ± 4.58 | ||
| BCVA, LogMAR (Snellen equivalent) | 0.0346 (20/20) ± 0.0520 | 0.0367(20/20) ± 0.0528 | 0.833 |
| 3 mm-scan quality | 8.46 ± 0.67 | 8.55 ± 0.91 | 0.368 |
| 4.5-scan quality | 8.67 ± 0.71 | 8.55 ± 0.87 | 0.588 |
| Central retinal thickness (µm) | 245.75 ± 16.92 | 246.24 ± 19.72 | 0.892 |
SD, deviation; DM, diabetes mellitus.
A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Comparison of OCTA Metrics Between Diabetic Eyes Without Clinical Signs of Diabetic Retinopathy and Healthy Controls Using Univariate Analysis
| Normal Controls (52 Eyes, Mean ± SD) | Diabetic Eyes Without Clinical Signs of DR (49 Eyes, Mean ± SD) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| FAZ associated parameters (3 mm × 3 mm) | |||
| FAZ area, mm2 | 0.35 ± 0.10 | 0.32 ± 0.11 | 0.211 |
| FAZ perimeter, mm | 2.38 ± 0.39 | 2.28 ± 0.40 | 0.197 |
| AI | 1.15 ± 0.06 | 1.14 ± 0.04 | 0.932 |
| FD-300 | 51.18% ± 3.16% | 48.90% ± 3.45% | 0.001 |
| Superficial retinal layer (3 mm × 3 mm) | |||
| VD_all | 45.70% ± 4.96% | 44.37% ± 4.24% | 0.602 |
| VD_central | 29.30% ± 4.46% | 28.89% ± 5.04% | 0.160 |
| VD_temporal | 46.88% ± 5.07% | 45.80% ± 4.49% | 0.676 |
| VD_superior | 48.14% ± 5.26% | 46.54% ± 0.04% | 0.091 |
| VD_inferior | 47.42% ± 6.05% | 46.13% ± 0.04% | 0.267 |
| VD_nasal | 47.32% ± 4.78% | 45.87% ± 0.04% | 0.616 |
| EAA, mm2 | 0.0009 ± 0.0016 | 0.0032 ± 0.0093 | 0.148 |
| VLF | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.676 |
| Fractal dimension | 1.75 ± 0.01 | 1.75 ± 0.02 | 0.716 |
| VDI | 7.01 ± 0.241 | 7.08 ± 0.29 | 0.229 |
| Deep retinal layer (3 mm × 3 mm) | |||
| VD_all | 47.88% ± 4.17% | 47.41% ± 4.76% | 0.796 |
| VD_central | 20.36% ± 4.72% | 21.80% ± 5.48% | 0.160 |
| VD_temporal | 50.00% ± 4.25% | 49.61% ± 5.04% | 0.817 |
| VD_superior | 51.45% ± 4.87% | 50.85% ± 5.89% | 0.760 |
| VD_inferior | 51.55% ± 5.19% | 50.37% ± 5.46% | 0.236 |
| VD_nasal | 49.67% ± 4.72% | 49.17% ± 5.34% | 0.957 |
| EAA, mm2 | 0.0003 ± 0.0014 | 0.0005 ± 0.0017 | 0.411 |
| VLF | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.128 |
| Fractal dimension | 1.75 ± 0.01 | 1.75 ± 0.01 | 0.114 |
| VDI | 5.49 ± 0.10 | 5.51 ± 0.12 | 0.932 |
| Peripapillary RPCP (4.5 mm × 4.5 mm) | |||
| VD-whole area | 50.43% ± 7.34% | 47.64% ± 7.99% | 0.070 |
| VD-temporal | 55.20% ± 6.75% | 52.15% ± 8.07% | 0.065 |
| VD-superior | 49.12% ± 8.31% | 46.73% ± 8.81% | 0.164 |
| VD-inferior | 50.09% ± 8.16% | 46.78% ± 8.39% | 0.047 |
| VD-nasal | 46.71% ± 8.30% | 44.29% ± 8.64% | 0.153 |
| VLF | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.052 |
| Fractal dimension | 1.68 ± 0.02 | 1.67 ± 0.03 | 0.024 |
| VDI | 8.05 ± 0.41 | 8.21 ± 0.48 | 0.053 |
SD, standard deviation; AI, acircularity index; VD, vessel density.
P < 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference between the groups.
Binary Logistic Regression Model for The Parameters That Selected by the Univariate Analysis
| Variates | b | Sb | Wald χ2 |
| Odds Ratio | 95% Confidence Interval |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No adjusting for age and sex, 101 eyes of 101 patients | ||||||
| FD-300 | 1.221 | 0.438 | 7.756 | 0.005 | 3.391 | 1.436–8.007 |
| RPCP-VD-inferior | 0.159 | 0.595 | 0.071 | 0.790 | 1.172 | 0.365–3.764 |
| RPCP-fractal dimension | 0.588 | 0.613 | 0.920 | 0.337 | 1.800 | 0.541–5.987 |
| Adjusting for age and sex, 101 eyes of 101 patients | ||||||
| FD-300 | 1.276 | 0.460 | 7.704 | 0.006 | 3.582 | 1.455–8.817 |
| RPCP-VD-inferior | 0.126 | 0.601 | 0.044 | 0.834 | 1.134 | 0.349–3.685 |
| RPCP-fractal dimension | 0.614 | 0.619 | 0.984 | 0.321 | 1.847 | 0.549–6.212 |
VD, vessel density.
P < 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference between the groups.
Figure 2.LASSO was used to screen the parameters, and ROC curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic ability of the selected parameter. (A) LASSO regression model selected FD-300 from the 32 candidate variables. (B) ROC curve for the FD-300.