TY - JOUR
T1 - Measuring ocular torsion and its variations using different nonmydriatic fundus photographic methods
AU - Kang, Hyunkyoo
AU - Lee, Sang Jae
AU - Shin, Hyun Jin
AU - Lee, Andrew G.
N1 - Funding Information:
?Initials of the authors who received each award: H Kang ?Grant numbers awarded to each author: 2020R1I1A3075301 ?The full name of each funder: Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education ?URL of each funder website: www.nrf.re.kr www.moe.go.kr ?Did the sponsors or funders play any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript: The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2020 Kang et al.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Purpose: To compare the variations in ocular torsion measurements made using different fundus photographic methods. Methods: We enrolled subjects with three conditions: (1) patients with intermittent exotropia (IXT) (n = 44), (2) patients with unilateral superior oblique palsy (SOP) (n = 10), and (3) normal subjects as controls (n = 85). Ocular torsion was measured by disc-center-fovea angle (DFA) using three different imaging modalities: (1) conventional fundus photography (CFP) with a 45° field of view (FV), (2) wide-field fundus photography (WFP) with a 200° FV, and (3) optical coherence tomography (OCT) with a 55° FV. Results: In the IXT group, the DFAs in the right and left eyes were 5.70±3.35° and 6.37±3.36°, respectively, for CFP, 8.39±5.24° and 8.61±3.67° for WFP, and 5.73±3.61° for 6.16±3.50° for OCT. In the SOP group, the DFAs in paretic and nonparetic eyes were 12.19±1.69° and 6.71±1.09°, respectively, for CFP, 14.29±2.36° and 8.23±3.31° for WFP, and 12.12±1.73° and 6.91±1.12° for OCT. In the control group, the DFAs in the right and left eyes were 5.39±2.65° and 5.71 ±3.16°, respectively, for CFP, 8.77±5.56° and 8.90±6.24° for WFP, and 5.27±2.67° and 5.72 ±3.20° for OCT. There was no difference between the results from CFP and OCT among the three groups. However, the torsional angle was larger when measured using WFP than the other two photographic methods (CFP and OCT) in all three groups (all p<0.05). Conclusion: The ocular torsion measurement varies with the fundus photographic method used to measure it. Clinicians should be careful to avoid overestimating ocular extorsion when it is evaluated using WFP.
AB - Purpose: To compare the variations in ocular torsion measurements made using different fundus photographic methods. Methods: We enrolled subjects with three conditions: (1) patients with intermittent exotropia (IXT) (n = 44), (2) patients with unilateral superior oblique palsy (SOP) (n = 10), and (3) normal subjects as controls (n = 85). Ocular torsion was measured by disc-center-fovea angle (DFA) using three different imaging modalities: (1) conventional fundus photography (CFP) with a 45° field of view (FV), (2) wide-field fundus photography (WFP) with a 200° FV, and (3) optical coherence tomography (OCT) with a 55° FV. Results: In the IXT group, the DFAs in the right and left eyes were 5.70±3.35° and 6.37±3.36°, respectively, for CFP, 8.39±5.24° and 8.61±3.67° for WFP, and 5.73±3.61° for 6.16±3.50° for OCT. In the SOP group, the DFAs in paretic and nonparetic eyes were 12.19±1.69° and 6.71±1.09°, respectively, for CFP, 14.29±2.36° and 8.23±3.31° for WFP, and 12.12±1.73° and 6.91±1.12° for OCT. In the control group, the DFAs in the right and left eyes were 5.39±2.65° and 5.71 ±3.16°, respectively, for CFP, 8.77±5.56° and 8.90±6.24° for WFP, and 5.27±2.67° and 5.72 ±3.20° for OCT. There was no difference between the results from CFP and OCT among the three groups. However, the torsional angle was larger when measured using WFP than the other two photographic methods (CFP and OCT) in all three groups (all p<0.05). Conclusion: The ocular torsion measurement varies with the fundus photographic method used to measure it. Clinicians should be careful to avoid overestimating ocular extorsion when it is evaluated using WFP.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85099077467&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85099077467&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0244230
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0244230
M3 - Article
C2 - 33351818
AN - SCOPUS:85099077467
VL - 15
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
SN - 1932-6203
IS - 12 December 2020
M1 - e0244230
ER -