Abstract
Purpose:
We investigate the interocular symmetry of fixation, optic disc, and corneal astigmatism in bilateral high myopia, and evaluate the predictive relationships between them.
Methods:
We enrolled 202 cases with bilateral high myopia. Fixation, in terms of the bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA), was evaluated with the Macular Integrity Assessment microperimetry. Optic disc features, including orientation, tilt, and rotation, were evaluated with ultrawide-field retinal photographs. Corneal topography was performed with Pentacam. Interocular symmetry of fixation, optic disc, and corneal astigmatism was assessed, and the predictive relationships between these parameters were investigated.
Results:
Axial length differences between the two eyes were: ≥0 to ≤1 mm, 67.8%; 1 to ≤2 mm, 20.3%; 2 to ≤3 mm, 9.4%; and >3 mm, 2.5%. Axial length, 95% BCEA, and magnitude of corneal astigmatism showed good interocular symmetry, whereas the optic disc tilt, rotation, and axis of corneal astigmatism (mirror axes) showed less symmetry (all P < 0.05). No interocular symmetry was observed in the direction of the fixation ellipse. In both eyes, the corneal steep meridian more often was consistent with the optic disc orientation than inconsistent (right eye [OD], P < 0.001; left eye [OS], P = 0.029).
Conclusions:
As different parameters presented different degrees of symmetry, cautions are needed when including both eyes or only one lateral eye in cases of bilateral high myopia for clinical investigations. The optic disc orientation, to some extent, may indicate the steep meridian of the cornea.
Translational Relevance:
Our study provided evidences for selection of eye laterality in clinical investigations of highly myopic eyes.
Preoperative examinations included assessment of visual acuity, tonometry, measurement of axial length (IOLMaster 500, Version 7.7; Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany), funduscopy, B scans, and macular scans with optical coherence tomography (OCT; Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000; Carl Zeiss AG). Corneal topography was performed with the Pentacam system (Pentacam HR, Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany), and the steep meridian of the anterior corneal astigmatism was recorded. Follow-up included assessment of visual acuity, manifest refraction, tonometry, funduscopy, retinal photography, MAIA microperimetry, and an OCT macular scan.
Fixation was assessed using the MAIA microperimetry system. The patients were asked to stare at the fixation stimulus, which consisted of a red circle with a diameter of 1°. The eye trackers within the MAIA system detected fixation loss as a misalignment of the directions of the central fixation stimulus and gaze, and recorded the points of fixation. The device then automatically calculated two parameters of fixation: the BCEA, which refers to the area (in degrees squared, deg2) of the ellipse containing most of the fixation positions registered during the measurement procedure, and the fixation ellipse angle, the orientation of the longest ellipse diameter. BCEA normally is calculated by considering 63% or 95% of the fixation points. Because these two parameters are similar, only 95% BCEA was used for further analysis in this study.
The characteristics of the subjects are shown in
Table 1. Average age was 61.41 ± 8.56 years; 81 subjects were male and 121 were female. No statistically significant differences were found between the left and right eyes in terms of uncorrected (UCVA) and best corrected (BCVA) visual acuity, axial length, intraocular pressure, 95% BCEA, fixation ellipse angle, optic disc rotation, corneal astigmatism, or steep corneal meridian (Student's
t-test, all
P > 0.05), except that the left eyes had significantly higher optic tilt ratios than the right eyes (1.31 ± 0.22 vs. 1.36 ± 0.24, Student's
t-test,
P = 0.002).
Figure 2 shows the distribution of axial lengths in both eyes indicating the distribution of myopia severity.
Table 1 Demographic Data for the Participants
Table 1 Demographic Data for the Participants
We firstly investigated interocular symmetry. The distributions of the differences in axial length between the two eyes were: ≥0 to ≤1 mm, 67.8% (137/202); 1 to ≤2 mm, 20.3% (41/202); 2 to ≤3 mm, 9.4% (19/202); and >3 mm, 2.5% (5/202).
Table 2 presents the interocular differences in different parameters (ICC analysis). High interocular symmetry was observed for axial length, 95% BCEA, and magnitude of corneal astigmatism (ICC analysis, all
P < 0.05). The optic disc tilt, rotation and steep corneal meridian (axis of the right eye and mirror axis of the left eye) showed low to moderate correlations (ICC analysis, all
P < 0.05), indicating interocular asymmetry increased. The findings were similar with Pearson's correlation analysis (
Fig. 3). However, no interocular symmetry was detected for the direction of the fixation ellipse with either statistical method (Pearson's analysis,
r = 0.017,
P = 0.808; ICC = 0.034,
P = 0.40).
Table 2 ICC Analysis of the Ocular Characteristics of the Right and Left Eyes
Table 2 ICC Analysis of the Ocular Characteristics of the Right and Left Eyes
Figure 4 presents the distributions of the fixation ellipse angles, optic disc tilt and rotation, orientations of the longest disc diameters, and steep corneal meridians in the right and left eyes. The paired subfigures are colored as mirror images. The fixation angle was distributed almost evenly in all directions in both eyes; 50.50% of the right and 56.93% of left eyes had a tilted disc. Significant rotation of the disc occurred in 43.07% (87/202) of right and 48.02% (97/202) of left eyes. Inferior rotation was present in 68.8% and 68.3%, respectively. With regard to the orientation of the longest disc diameter, 59.9% of the right eyes were located between 90° and 120° and 15.84% between 120° and 150°, while 54.95% of the left eyes were located between 60° and 90° and 17.82% between 30° and 60°, suggesting both eyes presented inferior rotation in a symmetrical way.
From the cumulative distribution function curves shown in
Figure 5, the distribution pattern of the steep corneal meridian seemed more similar to that of the fixation ellipse angle than to that of the optic disc orientation. However, statistically significant differences were found in their distributions (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test: cornea vs. fixation, right eye,
P = 0.003; left eye,
P = 0.021; cornea vs disc, both eyes,
P < 0.001).
We then evaluated the predictive relationships between the direction of the fixation ellipse, orientation of the longest disc diameter, and steep corneal meridian. We defined 0° to 45° and 135° to 180° as the horizontal zone and 45 to 135° as the vertical zone. If the steep corneal meridian and optic disc orientation or the fixation ellipse angle were located in the same zone, their directions were considered consistent. The steep corneal meridian more often was consistent with the optic disc orientation than inconsistent in the right and left eyes, (χ2 test, right eye, P < 0.001; left eye, P = 0.029). However, no such consistency was detected between the steep corneal meridian and fixation ellipse angle in either eyes (χ2 test, both eyes, P = 0.111). In addition, the proportion of the angles between the steep corneal meridian and optic disc orientation that were <10° was 14.4% (29/202) in the right eye and 11.9% (24/202) in the left eye, and the proportion of the angles between the steep corneal meridian and fixation ellipse angle that were <10° was 13.9% (28/202) and 9.4% (19/202), respectively. If the angle range was set at <45°, the percentage was 55.9% (113/202) and 50.5% (102/202), respectively, for the former, and 49.5% (100/202) and 46.5% (94/202), respectively, for the latter.
Supported by research grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of the People's Republic of China (Grants 81870642, 81470613, 81100653, 81670835, and 81270989), Shanghai High Myopia Study Group, International Science and Technology Cooperation Foundation of Shanghai (Grant 14430721100), Shanghai Talent Development Fund (Grant 201604), Shanghai Youth Doctor Support Program (Grant 2014118), Outstanding Youth Medical Talents Program of Shanghai Health and Family Planning Commission (Grant 2017YQ011), and the National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People's Republic of China (Grant 201302015).
Author contributions: study design (X.Z., Y.L.); study performance (W.H., Y.D., K.Z.); data collection and management (W.H., Y.D., K.Z.); data analysis and interpretation (X.Z., W.H.); writing and review of the manuscript (X.Z., Y.L.). All authors have approved the manuscript.
Disclosure: X. Zhu, None; W. He, None; Y. Du, None; K. Zhang, None; Y. Lu, None