ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Determining the Location of the Fovea Centralis Via En-Face SLO and Cross-Sectional OCT Imaging in Patients Without Retinal Pathology.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of post-operative foveal location and microstructural changes after pars plana vitrectomy for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment using enhanced-depth imaging optical coherence tomography.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2024Article
- A New Vessel-Based Method to Estimate Automatically the Position of the Nonfunctional Fovea on Altered Retinography From Maculopathies.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose was to establish the position of the fovea centralis to the optic nerve via en-face, near-infrared spectral domain optical coherence tomography (NIR-OCT) in healthy patients. This may shed light on physiological variability and be used for studying subtle cases of foveal ectopia in macular pathology and after retinal detachment. Methods: SD-OCT data of 890 healthy eyes were retrospectively analyzed. Exclusion criteria included axial myopia causing tilting of the optic disc, peripapillary atrophy >1/3 the width of the disc, macular images excluding greater than half of the optic disc, and patients unable to maintain vertical head positioning. Two independent reviewers measured the horizontal and vertical distance from the fovea to the optic disc center and optic disc diameter via cross-sectional and en-face scanning laser ophthalmoloscopy OCT imaging. Results: 890 eyes were included in the study. The right and left eyes differed in the horizontal distance from the fovea to the disc center (4359 vs. 4248 µm, P < 0.001) and vertical distance from the fovea to the disc center (464 µm vs. 647, P < 0.001). This corresponded to a smaller angle between the right and left eyes (6.07° vs. 8.67°, P < 0.001). Older age was associated with a larger horizontal (P = 0.008) and vertical distance (0.025). These differences persisted after correcting for axial length in the 487 patients with axial-length data. Conclusions: This study compares the position of the fovea centralis among individuals without macular pathology on a micron level basis. The significant variability between right and left eyes indicates that contralateral eye evaluation cannot be reliably used. Rather, true foveal ectopia requires assessments of preoperative and postoperative NIR-OCT scans. This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia. Translational Relevance: This finding is relevant to retinal detachment cases and evaluation of subtle foveal ectopia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.