| Title |
Changes in macular parameters in different types of amblyopia: optical coherence tomography study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s143223 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manal Ali Kasem, Amani E Badawi |
| Abstract |
The purposes of this study were to investigate the changes in macular parameters (thickness, volume) and peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness (RNFLT) in different cases of amblyopia versus the normal fellow eyes using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to estimate the relationship of OCT changes with various defined patients' parameters. This is a prospective, observational, cross-sectional case series. The method involved measuring the peripapillary RNFLT, macular thickness, and macular volume via spectral domain (OCT) in different types of amblyopia and comparing with the other fellow eyes. This study was conducted at the Mansoura Ophthalmic Center. A total of 64 patients with different types of amblyopia were included. The mean central macular thickness (CMT) was 196.2±50.03 µm in the amblyopic eyes versus 167±12.76 µm in the fellow eyes (P=0.000), the mean average macular thickness was 265.80±12.77 µm in the amblyopic eyes versus 259.10±3.09 µm in the fellow eyes (P=0.000), the mean macular volume was 7.59±0.32 mm(3) in the amblyopic eyes versus 7.34±0.071 mm(3) in the fellow eyes (P=0.002), and the mean global RNFLT was 97.00±11.60 µm in the amblyopic eyes versus 78.50±13.05 µm in the fellow eyes (P=0.029). There was a discrepancy between the different amblyopic types. Age and the axial length were the only independent variables that statistically significantly correlated with the CMT. The unilateral amblyopic eyes were prone to have a higher CMT and thicker global RNFL compared to those of the sound fellow eyes. Retinal variations between different types of the amblyopia differ from one type to another. The age could be considered as a predictor of the disease worsening and treatment prognosis. Further studies are required to emphasize these results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 61% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,299
of 327,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.