2014 - 1 Issue

Original article

Foveal Hypoplasia Detection by Optical Coherence Tomography

Radim Čech
Tomáš Utíkal – Jana Juhászová

Full Text links

DOI:

Published in Czech and Slovak Ophtalmology: 2014 - 1

Published on website: 20.03.2014

Keywords: foveal hypoplasia, optical coherence tomography, children

Summary

Purpose: To evaluate the contribution of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the diagnosis of foveal hypoplasia in children.

Material and methods: Children with foveal hypoplasia (FH) were examinated with device RTVue Fourier – domain (FD) – OCT, software – version 6.8 (Optovue Inc., Fremont, USA). A qualitative examination of the macular area was performed with single horizontal scan (1024 A-scans/frame). Macular thickness was measured and evaluated quantitatively with an automatic fast macular area protocol MM5 (Macular Map 5x5 mm). A control group of children was used for comparison.

Results: The quality was assessed with OCT image of the macula and quantitatively evaluated macular thickness and configuration in children with foveal hypoplasia. It was subsequently realized the comparison of macular OCT findings in healthy children. The OCT showed a reduction of foveal depression, continuous extension of the inner retinal layers through the area in which should be normally found fovea. Patients with foveal hypoplasia had thicker central macula and fovea than children in the control group.

Conclusion: OCT in our group of patients confirmed the final diagnosis of foveal hypoplasia. FDOCT is a noninvasive and quick method helpful in identifying retinal abnormalities in the diagnosis of foveal hypoplasia in children and may be useful in diagnosing patients with unexplained decrease in vision.

References

  1. Baráková, D.: Echografie v oftalmo- logii. Professional Publishing, Praha, 2002, 1. vyd., 152 stran.
  2. Byrne S.T., Green R.L.: Ultrasound of the eye and orbit. USA, Mosby – an im- print of Elsevier Science, 2002, p. 505.
  3. Brandser, R., Haaskjold, E., Droslum, J.: Accuracy of IOL calculation in cataract surgery. Acta Ophthalmol Scand [online]. 1997; 75: 162–65 [cit. 2013-06-27]. Do- stupné z http://onlinelibrarywiley.com/ doi/10.1111/j.16000420.1997.tb00115.x.
  4. Drexler W., Findl, O., Menapace, R. et al.: Partial coherence interferometry: A novel approach to biometry in cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol, 1998; 126: 524–534.
  5. Eleftheriadis H.: IOL Master biometry: refractive results of 100 consecutive cases. British J Ophtalmol, 2003; 87: 960–963.
  6. Findl, O., Kriechbaum, K., Sacu, S.: Influence of operator experience on the performance of ultrasound biometry compared to optical biometry before ca- taract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg [online], 2003; 29, 10: 1950–1955 [cit. 2013-03-22]. Dostupné z: http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0886335003002438.
  7. Fontes, B.M., Bruno, M., Fontes, L. et al.: Intraocular lens power calculation by measuring axial length with partial optical coherence and ultrasonic bio- metry. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmol [online]. 2011; 3 [cit. 2013-06-30]. DOI: 10.1590/S0004-27492011000300004. Dostupné z http://www.scielo.br/ scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pi- d=S0004-27492011000300004.
  8. Haigis, W., Kohnen, T.: Optical Cohe- rence Biometry: Modern Cataract Sur- gery [online]. Karger: Dev Ophthalmol. Basel, 2002; [cit. 2013-06-18]. ISBN 10.1159/000060791. 119–130. Dostupné z http://www.karger.com/ Article/PDF/60791.
  9. Haigis, W., Lege, B., Miller, N. et al.: Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interfe- rometry for intraocular lens calculating according to Haigis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Opthalmol. [Internet]. 2000 [cited 2013 Jun13]; 765–773. Available from: http://link.springer.com/content/pd- f/10.1007%2Fs 004170000188.pdf
  10. Hřebcová, J., Vašků, A.: Srovnání kontaktní a imerzní ultrazvukové bio- metrie. Čes a Slov Oftal, 2008; 64: 1803–6597.
  11. Hoffer, K. J.: Accuracy of ultrasound intraocular lens calculation. Arch Oph- thalmol, 1981; 99: 1819–1823.
  12. Hoffer, K. J.: Ultrasound velocities for axial eye length measurement. J Cata- ract Refract Surg, 1994; 20: 554–562.
  13. Kavan, P., Vlková, E., Blatek, J.: Přes- nost ultrazvukového měření axiální dél- ky oka. Čs Oftal, 1991; 47, 2: 144–149.
  14. Korynta, J., Cendelín, J.: Teoretické základy bezchybné biometrie. Čes a Slov Oftal, 1995; 51, 1: 44–55.
  15. Korynta, J., Hycl, J., Křepelková, S.: Biometrie velmi krátkých bulbů. Čes a Slov oftal, 1998; 54, 2: 109–114.
  16. Kuchynka, P. a kolektiv.: Oční lékař- ství. Praha: Grada Publishing, a.s., 2007. ISBN 978-80-247-1163-8. s. 395–414.
  17. Mahdavi, S.: The IOLMaster and its role in modern cataract surgery, No- vember 2011. Available at: http://sm- 2strategic. com/files/IOLMaster-Holla- day_r6.pdf(accessed 11 June 2013).
  18. Mahdavi, S.: IOL Master 500: improving upon the gold standard in biometry for ca- taract surgery, 2010. Available at: http:// sm2strategic.com/files/2010-Nov-The- -IOLMaster-500-for-Cataract-Surgery- -Carl-Zeiss.pdf (accessed 11 June 2013).
  19. Nemeth, G., Nagy, A., Berta, A.: Comparison of intraocular lens power prediction using immersion ultrasound and optical biometry with and without formula optimization. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. [online]. 2012; 9: 1321–5 [cit. 2013-09-15]. DOI: 10.1007/ s00417-012-2013-9. Epub 2012 Apr 13. Dostupné z: http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/ 22527318.
  20. Rajan, M.S., Keilhorn, I., Bell, J.A.: Partial coherence laser interferometry vs conventional ultrasound biometry in intraocular lens power calculations. Eye: journal of The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. [online]. 2002; 16: 552–556 [cit. 2013-03-18]. Dostupné z: http://www.nature. com/eye/journal/ v16/n5/abs/ 6700157a.html.
  21. Ribeiro, F., Castanheira-Dinis, A., Dias, J.M.: Refractive error assess- ment: influence of different optical ele- ments and current limits of biometric techniques. J Refract Surg. [online]. 2013; 29, 3: 206–12. [cit. 2013-07-12]. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20130129-07. Dostupné z: http://www. ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pubmed/23446018.
  22. Kuchynka, P., Továrek, L.: One- mocnění čočky. In Rozsíval, P. et al, Oční lékařství, Praha, Galén a Univezita Karlova, 2006. ISBN 80- 7262-404-0. p. 225–29.
  23. Sanders, D.R., Retzlaff, J.A., Kraff, M.C.: A-scan biometry and IOL implant power calculations. American Academy of Ophthal- mology, Focal Points – Clin. Mod. Ophthalmol., 1995; 10: 14.
  24. Shammas, J. H.: Atlas of ophthal- mic ultrasonography and biometry St. Louis, CV Mosby Co., 1984, 273–308.
  25. Shen, P., Zheng, Y., Ding, X.: Biometric measurements in highly myopic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg [online], 2013; 39: 180–7 [cit. 2013-06-11]. DOI: 10.1016/j. jcrs.2012.08.064. Epub 2012 Dec 7. Dostupné z: http://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23228592.
  26. Skorkovská, Š., Michálek, J., Ru- bertová, M. et al.: Srovnání ultrazvu- kové a optické biometrie s ohledem na refrakci očí po operaci katarakty. Čes a Slov Oftal, 2004; 1: 24–29.
  27. Steinert, R.F.: Cataract sugery, 2. vyd. USA: Saunders, Elsevier Health Sciences, 2010. ISBN 978- 1-4160-3225-0. Část 4, p. 33-55. Dostupné z http://www. google. cz/books?hl=cs&lr=lang_en&i- d=NbM_MAd0dLIC&oi=fnd& - pg=PP1&dq=Phaco-chop&ot- s=A3GvvX_a4t&sig=rbWpFtr-Dpf68UbqckioH8RnIF4&redir_esc=y. Upon correct measurement by an ultrasound probe, the results of both methods correlate to a large extent and are therefore mutually interchangeable. In the above-mentioned ca- ses optical biometry cannot be used, and as a result it is still essential to have an ultrasound instrument available in surgical centres. Unfortunately, the current relatively low frequency of use of the ultrasound method, in com- parison with the time when it was the only possible alternative, increases the probability of an imprecise measurement of AL with all the negative refractive consequences ensuing from this. As a result, today it is all the more necessary to lay stress on maximum precision of performance of ul