Individual variations in human cone photoreceptor packing density: Variations with refractive error
Individual variations in human cone photoreceptor packing density: Variations with refractive error
复制标题
DOI：
10.1167/iovs.08-2135
复制
发表时间：
2008-10-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Burns, Stephen A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chui, Toco Yuen Ping;Song, HongXin;Burns, Stephen A.
目的。测量视网膜上人类视锥光感受器堆积密度的变化，包括个体内部和具有不同屈光不正的个体之间。方法。使用高分辨率自适应光学扫描激光检眼镜对 11 个人眼的视锥细胞进行成像。对五名正视眼受试者和六名近视受试者进行了测试（+ 0.50 至 -7.50 D）。对于每个受试者，获得四个大约 10 度 x 1.5 度的锥形图像条。每条带从中央凹开始，沿着四个主要经络向外围延伸。采样窗口内每个锥体的位置由研究人员手动数字化。根据这些视锥细胞计数，计算整个图像中距中央凹的一组固定距离的视锥细胞密度。结果。五只正视眼沿上子午线的视网膜偏心率为 0.30 至 3.40 毫米，视锥细胞光感受器堆积密度从 27,712 个细胞/mm(2) 降至 7,070 个细胞/mm(2)。近视眼的视锥细胞堆积密度（每平方毫米细胞数）显着低于正视眼。在给定位置，锥体光感受器堆积密度存在相当大的个体差异，尽管超过 20% 的差异可以由轴长度的差异来解释。结论。结果提供了健康人眼视锥光感受器堆积密度个体差异的基线分析。正如视网膜拉伸模型所预测的，高度近视眼的视锥细胞堆积密度低于正视眼。
PURPOSE. To measure the variation in human cone photoreceptor packing density across the retina, both within an individual and between individuals with different refractive errors. METHODS. A high-resolution adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscope was used to image the cones of 11 human eyes. Five subjects with emmetropia and six subjects with myopia were tested (+ 0.50 to -7.50 D). For each subject, four approximately 10 degrees x 1.5 degrees strips of cone images were obtained. Each strip started at the fovea and proceeded toward the periphery along the four primary meridians. The position of each cone within the sampling windows was digitized manually by the investigator. From these cone counts, the density of the cones was calculated for a set of fixed distances from the fovea at locations throughout the image. RESULTS. Cone photoreceptor packing density decreased from 27,712 cells/mm(2) to 7,070 cells/mm(2) from a retinal eccentricity of 0.30 to 3.40 mm along the superior meridian in five emmetropic eyes. Cone photoreceptor packing density (cells per square millimeter) was significantly lower in myopic eyes than in emmetropic eyes. At a given location, there was considerable individual variation in cone photoreceptor packing density, although more than 20% of the variance could be accounted for by differences in axial length. CONCLUSIONS. The results provide a baseline analysis of individual difference in cone photoreceptor packing density in healthy human eyes. As predicted by retinal stretching models, cone photoreceptor packing density is lower in highly myopic eyes than in emmetropic eyes.