Skip to main content
. 2023 Sep 15;12(10):631–650. doi: 10.1093/stcltm/szad051

Table 9.

Comparison of assessment parameters before the applications and at the end of the 3-year follow-up period between 4 groups.

To-T1 Wj-Msc1 Magnovision2 Wj-Msc + Magnovision3 Control4 P*** Difference**
X ± s.s. X ± s.s. X ± s.s. X ± s.s.
ΔHorizontal EZW 0.20 ± 0.05 0.34 ± 0.08 0.04 ± 0.01 0.86 ± 0.21 0.01* 4 > 1.2 > 3
ΔVertical EZW 0.20 ± 0.04 0.35 ± 0.09 0.07 ± 0.02 0.80 ± 0.22 0.03* 4 > 1.2 > 3
ΔFAF field 0.39 ± 0.11 1.50 ± 0.41 0.07 ± 0.02 3.76 ± 1.02 0.01* 4 > 2 > 1 > 3
ΔBCVA 3.59 ± 0.97 4.84 ± 1.31 −0.16 ± -0.04 12.04 ± 3.25 0.01* 4 > 1.2 > 3
ΔFPDI 0.50 ± 0.14 2.66 ± 0.72 0.01 ± 0.00 7.25 ± 1.96 0.01* 4 > 2 > 1 > 3
ΔERG magnitude −0.01 ± 0.00 −0.04 ± −0.01 −0.14 ± -0.04 0.06 ± 0.02 0.02* 3 > 1,2,4

***Kruskall-Wallis test; **Mann-Whitney U test; *0.05 statistically significant.

BCVA, best corrected visual acuity, (ETDRS letters); ERG magnitudes, full field flicker electroretinography magnitudes (mV); EZW, ellipsoid zone width (mm); FAF, fundus autofluorescence (mm2); FPDI, Fundus perimetry deviation index (%).