Variations of OCT measurements corrected for the magnification effect according to axial length and refractive error in children

The aim of this paper was to examine the distribution of macular, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and optic disc parameters of myopic and hyperopic eyes in comparison with emmetropic control eyes and to investigate their variation according to axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent (SE) in healthy children. Methods: This study included 293 pairs of eyes of 293 children (145 boys and 148 girls), ranging in age from 6 to 17 years. Subjects were divided according to SE in control (emmetropia, 99 children), myopia (100 children) and hyperopia (94 children) groups and according to axial AL in 68 short ((Formula presented.)22.00(Formula presented.)mm, 68), medium (from (Formula presented.)22.00(Formula presented.)mm to 25.00(Formula presented.)mm, 189) and long eyes ((Formula presented.)25.00(Formula presented.)mm, 36). Macular parameters, RNFL thickness and optic disc morphology were assessed by the CirrusTM HD-OCT. AL was measured using the IOL-Master system. Littmann’s formula was used for calculating the corrected AL-related ocular magnification. Results: Mean age ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) was 10.84(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)3.05 years; mean ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) SE was (Formula presented.)0.14(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)0.51 D (range from (Formula presented.)8.75 to (Formula presented.)8.25 D) and mean AL ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) was 23.12(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)1.49. Average RNFL thickness, average macular thickness and macular volume decreased as AL and myopia increased. No correlations between AL/SE and optic disc parameters were found after correcting for magnification effect. Conclusions: AL and refractive error affect measurements of macular and RNFL thickness in healthy children. To make a correct interpretation of OCT measurements, ocular magnification effect should be taken into account by clinicians or OCT manufacturers.Postprint (published version

Relationship among Corneal Biomechanics, Refractive Error, and Axial Length

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between different ocular and corneal biomechanical parameters in emmetropic and ametropic healthy white children. Methods: This study included 293 eyes of 293 healthy Spanish children (135 boys and 158 girls), ranging in age from 6 to 17 years. Subjects were divided according to the refractive error: control (emmetropia, 99 children), myopia (100 children), and hyperopia (94 children) groups. In all cases, corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were evaluated with the Ocular Response Analyzer system. Axial length (AL) and mean corneal power were also measured by partial coherence interferometry (IOLMaster), and central corneal thickness (CCT) and anterior chamber depth were measured by anterior segment optical coherence tomography (Visante). Results: Mean (±SD) CH and CRF were 12.12 (±1.71) and 12.30 (±1.89) mm Hg, respectively. Mean (±SD) CCT was 542.68 (±37.20) μm and mean (±SD) spherical equivalent was +0.14 (±3.41) diopters. A positive correlation was found between CH and CRF (p < 0.001), and both correlated as well with CCT (p < 0.0001). Corneal resistance factor was found to decrease with increasing age (p = 0.01). Lower levels of CH were associated with longer AL and more myopia (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Higher values of CH were associated with increasing hyperopia. Significant differences in CH were found between emmetropic and myopic groups (p < 0.001) and between myopic and hyperopic groups (p = 0.011). There were also significant differences in CRF between emmetropic and myopic groups (p = 0.02). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that lower CH and CRF significantly associated with thinner CCT, longer AL, and flatter corneal curvature. Conclusions: The Ocular Response Analyzer corneal biomechanical properties seem to be compromised in myopia from an early age, especially in high myopia

Corneal Biomechanics, Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer, and Optic Disc in Children

Purpose: To evaluate the possible associations between corneal biomechanical parameters, optic disc morphology, and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness in healthy white Spanish children. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 100 myopic children and 99 emmetropic children as a control group, ranging in age from 6 to 17 years. The Ocular Response Analyzer was used to measure corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor. The optic disc morphology and RNFL thickness were assessed using posterior segment optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT). The axial length was measured using an IOLMaster, whereas the central corneal thickness was measured by anterior segment optical coherence tomography (Visante OCT). Results: The mean (±SD) age and spherical equivalent were 12.11 (±2.76) years and −3.32 (±2.32) diopters for the myopic group and 11.88 (±2.97) years and +0.34 (±0.41) diopters for the emmetropic group. In a multivariable mixed-model analysis in myopic children, the average RNFL thickness and rim area correlated positively with CH (p = 0.007 and p = 0.001, respectively), whereas the average cup-to-disc area ratio correlated negatively with CH (p = 0.01). We did not observe correlation between RNFL thickness and axial length (p = 0.05). Corneal resistance factor was only positively correlated with the rim area (p = 0.001). The central corneal thickness did not correlate with the optic nerve parameters or with RNFL thickness. These associations were not found in the emmetropic group (p > 0.05 for all). Conclusions: The corneal biomechanics characterized with the Ocular Response Analyzer system are correlated with the optic disc profile and RNFL thickness in myopic children. Low CH values may indicate a reduction in the viscous dampening properties of the cornea and the sclera, especially in myopic children

Variations of OCT measurements corrected for the magnification effect according to axial length and refractive error in children

The aim of this paper was to examine the distribution of macular, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and optic disc parameters of myopic and hyperopic eyes in comparison with emmetropic control eyes and to investigate their variation according to axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent (SE) in healthy children. Methods: This study included 293 pairs of eyes of 293 children (145 boys and 148 girls), ranging in age from 6 to 17 years. Subjects were divided according to SE in control (emmetropia, 99 children), myopia (100 children) and hyperopia (94 children) groups and according to axial AL in 68 short ((Formula presented.)22.00(Formula presented.)mm, 68), medium (from (Formula presented.)22.00(Formula presented.)mm to 25.00(Formula presented.)mm, 189) and long eyes ((Formula presented.)25.00(Formula presented.)mm, 36). Macular parameters, RNFL thickness and optic disc morphology were assessed by the CirrusTM HD-OCT. AL was measured using the IOL-Master system. Littmann’s formula was used for calculating the corrected AL-related ocular magnification. Results: Mean age ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) was 10.84(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)3.05 years; mean ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) SE was (Formula presented.)0.14(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)0.51 D (range from (Formula presented.)8.75 to (Formula presented.)8.25 D) and mean AL ((Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)SD) was 23.12(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)(Formula presented.)1.49. Average RNFL thickness, average macular thickness and macular volume decreased as AL and myopia increased. No correlations between AL/SE and optic disc parameters were found after correcting for magnification effect. Conclusions: AL and refractive error affect measurements of macular and RNFL thickness in healthy children. To make a correct interpretation of OCT measurements, ocular magnification effect should be taken into account by clinicians or OCT manufacturers