Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33412568›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Three-dimensional composition of the photoreceptor cone layers in healthy eyes using adaptive-optics optical coherence tomography (AO-OCT).

Adrian Reumueller, Lorenz Wassermann, Matthias Salas, Markus Schranz, Valentin Hacker, Georgios Mylonas, Stefan Sacu, Wolfgang Drexler, Michael Pircher, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. How early can we detect diabetic retinopathy? A narrative review of imaging tools for structural assessment of the retina.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Adrian ReumuellerDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4344-4624
Lorenz WassermannDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Matthias SalasCenter for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Markus SchranzDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Valentin HackerDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Georgios MylonasDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Stefan SacuDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Wolfgang DrexlerCenter for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Michael PircherCenter for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ursula Schmidt-ErfurthDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Andreas PollreiszDepartment of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the signal composition of cone photoreceptors three-dimensionally in healthy retinas using adaptive optics optical coherence tomography (AO-OCT).

methodsStudy population. Twenty healthy eyes of ten subjects (age 23 to 67). Procedures. After routine ophthalmological assessments, eyes were examined using AO-OCT. Three-dimensional volumes were acquired at 2.5° and 6.5° foveal eccentricity in four main meridians (superior, nasal, inferior, temporal). Cone densities and signal compositions were investigated in four different planes: the cone inner segment outer segment junction (IS/OS), the cone outer segment combined with the IS/OS (ISOS+), the cone outer segment tips (COST) and full en-face plane (FEF) combining signals from all mentioned cone layers. Additionally, reliability of a simple semi-automated approach for assessment of cone density was tested. Main outcome measures. Cone density of IS/OS, IS/OS+, COST and FEF. Qualitative depiction and composition of each cone layer. Inter-rater agreement of cone density measurements.

resultsMean overall cone density at all eccentricities was highest at the FEF plane (21.160/mm2), followed by COST (20.450/mm2), IS/OS+ (19.920/mm2) and IS/OS (19.530/mm2). The different meridians and eccentricities had a significant impact on cone density, with lower eccentricity resulting in higher cone densities (p≤.001), which were highest at the nasal, then temporal, then inferior and then superior meridian. Depiction of the cone mosaic differed between all 4 layers regarding signal size and packing density. Therefore, different cone layers showed evident but not complete signal overlap. Using the semi-automated technique for counting of cone signals achieved high inter-rater reliability (ICC > .99).

conclusionsIn healthy individuals qualitative and quantitative changes in cone signals are found not only in different eccentricities and meridians, but also within different photoreceptor layers. The variation between cone planes has to be considered when assessing the integrity of cone photoreceptors in healthy and diseased eyes using adaptive optics technology.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMaleMiddle AgedRetinal Cone Photoreceptor CellsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Optical Coherence

Identifiers

PMID33412568
PMCPMC7790532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.