Table 2.
OCT and PR-VEP variables for the better eye between participants with and without ROP
| ROP (n= 7) | No-ROP (n= 33) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | p-value | 95% CI | |
| OCT parameters | ||||
| FAZ (mm2)1 | .00 ± .006 | .06 ± .09 | .003 | (.02, .09) |
| FAZ circularity1 | .00 ± .006 | .03 ± .03 | .000 | (.03, .04) |
| MVD (mm/mm2)2 | 19.8 ± 1.6 | 16.7 ± 3.0 | .006 | (-5.1, -1.1) |
| MVF (%)2 | 34.6 ± 1.1 | 31.1 ± 5.0 | .004 | (-5.7, -1.2) |
| CMT (µm)3 | 297.0 ± 23.6 | 290 ± 18.3 | .515 | (-5.1, 1.1) |
| CRT (µm)3 | 295.7 ± 23.6 | 268.5 ± 23.3 | .032 | (-51.6, -2.9) |
| RNFL thickness (µm)2 | 80.4 ± 7.0 | 94.1 ± 9.0 | .006 | (5.2, 22.2) |
| IPGCL thickness (µm)2 | 74.6 ± 5.1 | 83.2 ± 6.0 | .014 | (2.4, 14.9) |
| PR-VEP variables | ||||
| (66’) N70 latency (ms)4 | 75.3 ± 15.6 | 66.1 ± 4.6 | .258 | (-28.6, 10.1) |
| (66’) P100 latency (ms)2 | 117.1 ± 19.7 | 102.0 ± 6.6 | .163 | (-39.4, 9.2) |
| (66’) N70-P100 µV4 | 16.6 ± 9.7 | 18.8 ± 9.0 | .645 | (9.5, 14.0) |
| (16’) N70 latency (ms)2 | 82.7 ± 12.3 | 75.2 ± 5.0 | .248 | (-22.7, 7.7) |
| (16’) P100 latency (ms)5 | 123.0 ± 16.6 | 110.0 ± 8.3 | .156 | (-33.3, 7.3) |
| (16’) N70-P100 µV2 | 13.5 ± 8.0 | 17.3 ± 8.9 | .377 | (-5.9, 13.6) |
Mean ± SD and p-value with 95% CI from independent two-sample t-tests corrected for unequal variances for OCT and PR-VEP variables with ROP status as the grouping variable
BCVA best corrected visual acuity, CMT central macular thickness, CRT central retinal thickness, FAZ foveal avascular zone, IPGCL inner plexiform layer, mm2 square millimetre, ms milliseconds, MVD macular vascular density, MVF macular vascular flow, RNFL retinal nerve fibre layer, uV amplitude, µm micrometre, 66’ large checks, 16’ small checks
1ROP (n= 4), No-ROP (n= 25); 2ROP (n= 5), No-ROP (n= 25); 3ROP (n= 7), No-ROP (n= 26); 4ROP (n= 5), No-ROP (n= 26); 5ROP (n= 5), No-ROP (n= 24)
6The foveal avascular zone was not measurable in participants with ROP