BJO

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Published Online First: 27 June 2008. doi:10.1136/bjo.2007.127571
British Journal of Ophthalmology 2008;92:1076-1080
Copyright © 2008 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
bjo.2007.127571v1
92/8/1076    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vernon, S A
Right arrow Articles by Tattersal, C
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vernon, S A
Right arrow Articles by Tattersal, C

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer thickness in highly myopic Caucasians as measured by Stratus optical coherence tomography

S A Vernon, A P Rotchford, A Negi, S Ryatt, C Tattersal

Department of Ophthalmology, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK

Correspondence to:
Mr S A Vernon, B Floor, Department of Ophthalmology, Eye and ENT Unit, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK; stephen.vernon{at}nuh.nhs.uk

Aims: To assess peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness distribution in a group of non-glaucomatous Caucasian subjects with a high degree of myopia and to evaluate the relationship between RNFL thickness, both global and sectoral, and other variables including axial length and optic disc size.

Method: 31 eyes of 31 healthy Caucasian subjects with spherical equivalent >=–6 dioptres (D) were recruited from a community optometric practice. RNFL thickness was measured using the Stratus optical coherence tomography (OCT) Fast RNFL 3.4 mm scan protocol. Optic disc area was measured using the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph II and axial length using the IOL Master. Associations between RNFL measurements and axial length, spherical equivalent and optic disc area were evaluated by linear regression analysis.

Results: The sample had a mean age of 48.1 years, mean spherical equivalent of –7.7 D, and mean axial length of 26.5 mm. The mean (SD) RNFL thickness was 81.4 (13.7) µm. In comparison with the Status OCT normative database, the distribution of RNFL thickness was substantially lower in the study group. The greatest disparity was around 7 clock hours centred on the nasal meridian in which 26/31 (83.9%) had one or more clock hours in which RNFL thickness was below normal at the 5% probability level in comparison with the Stratus normative database. No statistically significant associations between mean RNFL thickness and age (p = 0.12), gender (p = 0.76), spherical equivalent (p = 0.80), cup:disc area ratio (p = 0.88), optic disc area (p = 0.14) or axial length (p = 0.18) were identified in this group. However, RNFL thickness from vertical quadrants and in particular the superior sector correlated strongly with axial length, age and optic disc area.

Conclusions: The Stratus OCT normative database may be misleading in highly myopic eyes from Caucasians resulting in a substantial proportion of false positive errors. Particular caution is needed when the RNFL appears to be below the normative database normal limit at the upper or lower poles or on the nasal side of the disc. Stratified normal databases are required for accurate diagnosis of conditions resulting in nerve fibre loss such as chronic glaucoma.


Competing interests: None.

Ethics approval: Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Nottingham Ethics Committee.

Patient consent: Patient consent was obtained.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2008 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.