单位：[1]Eye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China[2]NHC Key Laboratory of Myopia (Fudan University), Key Laboratory of Myopia, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, China[3]Shanghai Key Laboratory of Visual Impairment and Restoration, Shanghai, China[4]Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing, China.首都医科大学附属同仁医院[5]Beijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.首都医科大学附属同仁医院[6]Department of Ophthalmology, The Third Hospital of Mianyang, Sichuan Mental Health Center, Mianyang, Sichuan, China.[7]Department of Ophthalmology, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province，Kunming, Yunnan, China.云南省第一人民医院[8]Department of Ophthalmology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.临床科室眼科眼科首都医科大学附属北京友谊医院[9]Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the ganglion cell complex (GCC) parameters in primary angle closure suspects (PACS) and identify the related factors. Methods: A total of 731 subjects, including 289 subjects with PACS and 442 subjects without PACS, underwent RTVue XR OCT. GCC parameters were compared between the two groups. The linear mixed-effects model was performed to evaluate the relationships between the GCC parameters and related factors. Results: Significant differences were found in gender, age, spherical refractive error, height, waist, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, axial length, superior GCC thickness, ganglion cell complex focal loss volume, ganglion cell complex global loss volume, and ganglion cell complex root mean square between PACS and normal controls. The linear mixed-effects model showed that age (p = 0.008) and blood glucose (p = 0.001) were negatively correlated with average GCC thickness in PACS subjects, and PACS (p = 0.036) and age (p < 0.001) were the key influencing factors for average GCC thickness. Conclusion: GCC parameters in PACS subjects are different from those in normal controls. Careful explanation should be considered when evaluating changes of GCC parameters in patients with PACD. (C) 2021 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel
基金：
National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81970797]
第一作者单位：[1]Eye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China[2]NHC Key Laboratory of Myopia (Fudan University), Key Laboratory of Myopia, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, China[3]Shanghai Key Laboratory of Visual Impairment and Restoration, Shanghai, China
共同第一作者：
通讯作者：
通讯机构：[4]Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing, China.[*1]Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Key LaboratoryNo.1 Dongjiaominxiang, Dongcheng District, 100730, Beijing, China
