A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Applicability of the ISNT and IST rules on retinal nerve fiber layer measurement on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in normal Indian children. | LitMetric

Background: To determine the applicability of the ISNT (inferior>superior>nasal>temporal) and IST (inferior>superior>temporal) rules on retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) measurement on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) in normal children.

Methods: A prospective, cross-sectional study including consecutive subjects between the ages of 5-18 years who were born at term (≥37 weeks gestational age) and with a normal birth weight (≥2500 g) presenting to the out-patient department for refractive error examination. RNFL measurement was done on Spectralis SD-OCT. Exclusion criteria were best-corrected visual acuity less than 20/20, spherical equivalent (SE) > ± 5 diopter (D), applanation IOP >21 mmHg, cup-to-disc (C/D) ratio of >0.5, C/D ratio asymmetry of >0.2 between eyes and any retinal or optic disc anomaly as determined by mydriatic fundus examination. Subjects with amblyopia, strabismus, or family history of optic nerve or retinal disease were excluded. Poor cooperation for SDOCT imaging and lack of consent were other exclusion criteria.

Results: The ISNT rule on the RNFL was followed only by 30 eyes (23.8 %), while the IST rule was followed by 66 eyes (52.4 %) (p < 0.001). The superior RNFL was thicker than the inferior in 57 eyes (45.2 %) while the temporal RNFL was thicker than the nasal in 63 eyes (50 %). The age, gender, spherical equivalent, and disc size did not predict the followability of the ISNT and IST rules (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: The ISNT and the IST rules for RNFL are not universally followed by all normal eyes in children. All deviations should therefore not be considered pathological.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-2980-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

applicability isnt
8
isnt ist
8
ist rules
8
rules retinal
8
retinal nerve
8
nerve fiber
8
fiber layer
8
measurement spectral-domain
8
spectral-domain optical
8
optical coherence
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!