
Measuring ocular torsion and its variations using different nonmydriatic fundus photographic methods
Author(s) -
Hyunkyoo Kang,
Sang Jae Lee,
Hyun Jin Shin,
Andrew G. Lee
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0244230
Subject(s) - ophthalmology , fundus photography , medicine , fundus (uterus) , optical coherence tomography , strabismus , retinal , fluorescein angiography
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.