| Title |
Comparison of subfoveal choroidal structures in typical neovascular age-related macular degeneration and polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10384-018-0615-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yohei Takahashi, Hideki Koizumi, Taiji Hasegawa, Takahiko Izumi, Ichiro Maruko, Shozo Sonoda, Taiji Sakamoto, Tomohiro Iida |
| Abstract |
To evaluate and compare the intrachoroidal structures of eyes with typical neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) with those of eyes with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). Retrospective and comparative case series. Eighty-four treatment-naïve eyes of 84 patients (22 women and 62 men) with typical neovascular AMD or PCV located in the subfoveal region were studied. Cross-sectional images of the retina and choroid were obtained by swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). The horizontal SS-OCT images were analyzed by a manual delineation technique and by a binarization method. Thirty-nine eyes with typical neovascular AMD and 45 eyes with PCV were studied. Although the subfoveal choroidal thickness (SCT) did not differ significantly between the 2 subtypes (255.1 ± 86.7 µm in typical neovascular AMD and 289.2 ± 116.5 µm in PCV, P = 0.29), the ratio of the large choroidal vessel layer (LCVL) thickness to the SCT was significantly larger in the eyes with PCV than in the eyes with typical neovascular AMD (0.863 ± 0.084 vs 0.803 ± 0.125, P = 0.023). The binarization method did not find significant differences in the choroidal structure between the 2 subtypes. Multivariate logistic regression analyses found the ratio of the LCVL thickness to the SCT to be the only significantly different factor between typical neovascular AMD and PCV (P = 0.035). The intrachoroidal structures of typical neovascular AMD and PCV eyes differ significantly. In eyes with PCV, there seemed to be a greater dilation of the large choroidal vessels. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 43% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2018.
All research outputs
#20,529,173
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology
#351
of 494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,931
of 331,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 494 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.