The mean FAZ area in our cohort was generally comparable to previous reports.
Table 4 shows the range of FAZ areas measured in various studies with different OCTA instruments. The mean FAZ area (3 × 3 mm) in our cohort ranged from 0.244 to 0.288 mm
2, which is greater than the 0.17 mm
2 reported by Hwang et al.,
30 the 0.23 mm
2 reported by Linderman et al.,
31 the 0.233 mm
2 reported by Chen et al,
32 and the 0.22 to 0.27 mm
2 reported by La Spina et al.
33 It is lower than the 0.29 mm
2 reported by Iafe et al.
23 and is comparable to the 0.25 mm
2 reported by Carpineto et al,
34 the 0.25 to 0.28 mm
2 reported by Shahlaee et al.,
35 the 0.27 to 0.29 mm
2 reported by Magrath et al.,
24 and the 0.28 mm
2 reported by Coscas et al.
36 In general, the FAZ area varies significantly among individuals,
37 and these differences could be due to differences in sex, age, axial length, and/or racial distribution. Linderman et al.
31 indicated that the FAZ area was increased in females and that there was a negative correlation between axial length and FAZ area, which is likely due to the differences in ocular magnification across eyes. Moreover, Shiihara et al. reported that, although the interinstrument correlation coefficients were also high for the superficial FAZ, the absolute value of the FAZ area differed significantly among instruments with a significant fixed bias. Thus, these differences among studies might be due to participant and instrument factors.