October 2011
Volume 52, Issue 11
Free
Clinical and Epidemiologic Research  |   October 2011
Macular Pigment Optical Density in a South Indian Population
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Rajiv Raman
    From Shri Bhagwan Mahavir Vitreoretinal Services, Tamil Nadu, India;
  • Rajni Rajan
    the Elite School of Optometry, Tamil Nadu, India; and
  • Sayantan Biswas
    the Elite School of Optometry, Tamil Nadu, India; and
  • Kulothungan Vaitheeswaran
    the Department of Preventive Ophthalmology (Epidemiology and Biostatistics), Tamil Nadu, India.
  • Tarun Sharma
    From Shri Bhagwan Mahavir Vitreoretinal Services, Tamil Nadu, India;
  • Corresponding author:. Rajiv Raman, Shri Bhagwan Mahavir Vitreoretinal Services, Sankara Nethralaya, 18, College Road, Chennai, 600 006, Tamil Nadu, India; rajivpgraman@gmail.com
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science October 2011, Vol.52, 7910-7916. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-7636
  • Views
  • PDF
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Rajiv Raman, Rajni Rajan, Sayantan Biswas, Kulothungan Vaitheeswaran, Tarun Sharma; Macular Pigment Optical Density in a South Indian Population. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(11):7910-7916. doi: 10.1167/iovs.11-7636.

      Download citation file:


      © 2016 Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose.: To estimate the normal value of macular pigment optical density (MPOD) in an adult south Indian sample.

Methods.: Three hundred eyes of 161 healthy volunteers (30 men and 30 women in each of the age groups of 20–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, and ≥60 years) underwent MPOD measurement with a macular densitometer. Thirty-two eyes were also checked for intersession variability.

Results.: The mean MPODs in the Indian sample were 0.64 ± 0.23 log unit at 0.25° eccentricity, 0.50 ± 0.21 log unit at 0.5°, 0.37 ± 0.19 log unit at 1.00°, and 0.21 ± 0.16 log unit at 1.75°. At all the foveal eccentricities, the MPOD showed an increase from 20 to 29 to 30 to 39 years of age and thereby showed a decrease with age. The men aged 40 to 49 years had significantly higher MPOD than did the women (0.75 vs. 0.62 log unit, P = 0.039), and the women aged 50 to 59 years had higher MPOD than did the men (0.71 vs. 0.57 log unit, P = 0.019). There was no significant intersession or interocular variation.

Conclusions.: This study establishes the MPOD normogram in an adult Indian sample.

Macular pigment consists of two hydroxy carotenoids: lutein and zeaxanthin. 1,2 Visually, macular pigment presents as a yellow coloration concentrated in the fovea. Fundus reflectance and autofluorescence maps show ring patterns in the distribution of the macular pigment. 3 Macular carotenoids reach their highest levels in the axons of the photoreceptors and inner plexiform layers of the retina. 2 5 It has been proposed that macular carotenoids are related to visual performance in both normal subjects and those with ocular pathologies. 6 10 Epidemiologic studies have shown a controversial relationship between age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and the macular pigment optical density (MPOD). Although a few studies have shown an inverse relationship between AMD and MPOD, 11 14 most failed to prove any relationship. 15 17  
There are ethnic differences in macular pigment distribution. It is reported to be higher in African (0.59 ± 0.14 density units [DU]) than in white (0.36 ± 0.13 DU) non-Hispanics. 18 Tang et al. 19 estimated the average MPOD in Asian Chinese to be 0.48 ± 0.23, which was higher than in the white non-Hispanics but lower than in the Africans. Age and MPOD have a controversial relationship, with several studies, with various sample sizes and different techniques reporting different relationships between the two. 20 Lam et al. 21 showed a decline in macular pigment with age and significant sex differences in the middle age groups. Most of the studies are not comparable because of the difference in measuring techniques used, including heterochromatic flicker photometry (HFP), high-performance liquid chromatography, Raman resonance spectroscopy, and auto fluorescence. 20  
The relationship between sex and MPOD is equally controversial, with a few studies finding males having 13% to 30% higher MPOD than females, 22 24 whereas other found no effect of a subject's sex on MPOD. 11,19,25 28  
Reports on macular pigment density in an adult urban Indian population are not available. This study was conducted to fill this gap. 
Materials and Methods
Normative data were collected from 300 eyes of 161 healthy volunteers of south Indian origin working in our institute and/or their family members between April 2008 and March 2009. From 322 eyes of 161 subjects, 22 eyes with a history of cataract surgery were excluded in the final analysis. The sample was divided equally among the age groups of 20 to 29, 30 to 39, 40 to 49, 50 to 59, and ≥60 years; with each group containing 30 men and 30 women. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and a written informed consent was obtained from the subjects per the Declaration of Helsinki. Demographic data including age, sex, education, and the anthropometric measurements height, weight, waist, and hip were collected. Subjects included in the study had corrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better. Those with any ocular pathology, history of ocular surgery, systemic illness such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, a family history of AMD, past/present smoking, or a regular intake of carotenoids/vitamins/antioxidants were excluded. A comprehensive ocular examination was conducted, followed by the assessment of MPOD with a macular densitometer (Macular Metrics Corp., Rehoboth, DE). All the subjects were naive about performing psychophysical tasks. 
Macular densitometer is based on the principle of HFP. The basic measurement procedure involves presenting a small test stimulus that alternates between a measuring wavelength (460 nm) which is absorbed by macular pigments and a reference wavelength not absorbed by the pigments (540 nm). This stimulus is presented in the fovea. To the subject, this alternating stimulus appears as a small flickering light. The subject is given control of the intensity of the measuring light and the task of adjusting it to minimize the flicker. Flicker could be eliminated (null zone) if the luminance of the 460-nm light was increased to match that of the 540-nm light. This increase in luminance was related to the optical density of the macular pigment (i.e., if there was a larger amount of pigment present, the absorption of the 460-nm light would be greater and its luminance would have to be increased to match that of the 540-nm light). The amount of 460-nm light required to produce this null zone provides a measure of the MPOD at the retinal location of the test light. The alternation frequency must be optimized for each subject and the test stimuli used at each locus (see below). 
Each eye was tested randomly to minimize any potential order effect. Figure 1 shows the targets used for measuring MPOD; for 0.25° foveal eccentricity it was a solid disc of 15 min arc radius; for 0.50°, a solid disc of 0.5° arc radius; for 1.00°, an annulus with an inner radius of 50 min arc and an outer radius of 70 min arc; and for 1.75° an annulus with an inner radius of 90 min arc and an outer radius of 120 min arc. For the parafoveal measurement, the subject was asked to fixate on a red light located precisely at 7° from central fixation. Subjects requiring distance refractive error correction were provided the correction in trial frames or were allowed to wear their spectacles if the visual acuity achieved was 20/20. 
Figure 1.
 
Targets used at various foveal eccentricities for measuring MPOD. Target 1 for 25° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 15 min arc radius. Target 2 for 0.50° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 0.5° arc radius. Target 3 for 1.00° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 50 min arc and an outer radius of 70 min arc. Target 4 for 1.75° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 90 min arc and an outer radius of 120 min arc. Target 5 for 7° temporal eccentricity: test target of 1° radius.
Figure 1.
 
Targets used at various foveal eccentricities for measuring MPOD. Target 1 for 25° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 15 min arc radius. Target 2 for 0.50° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 0.5° arc radius. Target 3 for 1.00° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 50 min arc and an outer radius of 70 min arc. Target 4 for 1.75° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 90 min arc and an outer radius of 120 min arc. Target 5 for 7° temporal eccentricity: test target of 1° radius.
A small black dot was present at the center of the solid disks as a fixation aid and a fixation target of a 5-min arc radius was centered within each annulus for the same. The test stimulus was superimposed on a 6.00°, 1.5 log Td, 470-nm circular blue background for the foveal measurements. The subjects were given training until they were able to confidently recognize the null zone (i.e., zone of no/minimal flicker). 
The starting flicker frequency was set at 10 to 11 Hz. If the subject was unable to find a zone of no/minimal flicker, this frequency was increased until a zone of no/minimal flicker could be identified. If the null zone was wide, the flicker frequency was reduced. The flicker frequency was adjusted until the subject found a narrow null zone. For participants who had difficulty adjusting the flicker on their own, we performed the task on their behalf, instructing the subject to notify us immediately on cessation of the flicker sensation. A minimum of three readings (radiance measurements of the 460-nm light, which provides a null zone) were taken at each eccentricity. 
Subjects were constantly instructed to blink several times and to continue adjusting the knob until the blinking no longer allowed the sensation of flickering in the test targets to resume. Readings were deemed reliable and included in the study only if the standard deviation of the readings (radiance measurements of the 460-nm light which provides null zone) did not exceed 0.20. 29  
MPOD was measured using the formula, MPOD = −log10 (R f/R p), where R f is the radiance of the 460-nm light needed for the null zone at the foveal location being measured, and R p is the radiance of a null zone at the reference location in the parafovea, where MPOD is negligible. (MPOD is derived by subtracting the log foveal sensitivity from the log parafoveal sensitivity, measured at the 7° parafoveal reference point). It was calculated using the manufacturer's software provided by the Macular Metrics Corp., which fits an exponential function to the data and plots the spatial profile of the subject's MPOD. 
MPOD measurements were repeated in 32 eyes to assess the intersession variability of the readings. The duration between the first session and the repeat session ranged from 1 to 4 weeks depending on the compliance of the subjects. 
The normality distribution was checked for all quantitative variables. One way-ANOVA was used to compare between eccentricity (four levels) as a dependent variable and age group (1 decade for each level) as a factor. Two way-ANOVA was used, with eccentricity as the dependent variable and sex as a factor by age group. Multiple comparisons were performed with Bonferroni correction. Post hoc power was calculated by G Power 3.0. Test–retest repeatability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (Cronbach's α) and the agreement between the MPOD measurements obtained at first and repeat sessions were assessed with Bland-Altman plots. P ≤ 0.05 was considered significant (SPSS 14.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). 
Results
Three hundred eyes of 161 volunteers who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Figure 2 shows the frequency distribution of the MPOD values at 0.25°, 0.50°, 1.00°, and 1.75° foveal eccentricities. The mean MPOD was 0.64 ± 0.23 log unit (range, 0.08–1.29) at 0.25° foveal eccentricity, 0.50 ± 0.21 log unit (0.00 to 1.11) at 0.50°, 0.37 ± 0.19 log unit (−0.15 to 0.98) at 1.00°, and 0.21 ± 0.16 log unit (−0.17 to 0.82) at 1.75°. The mean time ± SD taken to measure MPOD at all four foveal eccentricities monocularly was 18 ± 8 minutes (range, 6–51 minutes). 
Figure 2.
 
Frequency distribution of MPOD at the four foveal eccentricities.
Figure 2.
 
Frequency distribution of MPOD at the four foveal eccentricities.
Figure 3 shows the mean MPOD at each eccentricity for the different age groups. In Figure 3A, the mean MPOD at 0.25° foveal eccentricity shows an increase from 20 to 29 years (0.63 ± 0.16 log units) to 30 to 39 years (0.72 ± 0.22 log units). Thereafter, MPOD declined in age groups 40 to 49, 50 to 59, and ≥60 years (0.69, 0.64, and 0.51, respectively). Figure 3B shows the MPOD at 0.50° foveal eccentricity to be increased from 20 to 29 years (0.51 ± 0.16 log units) to 30 to 39 years (0.55 ± 0.23 log units). Thereafter, MPOD declined in the age groups 40 to 49, 50 to 59, and ≥60 years (0.52, 0.50, and 0.41, respectively). Similarly, the MPOD at 1.00° foveal eccentricity (Fig. 3C) shows an increase from 20 to 29 (0.39 ± 0.16 log units) to 30 to 39 (0.42 ± 0.20 log units) years. Thereafter, MPOD declined in age groups 40 to 49, 50 to 59, and ≥60 years (0.40, 0.36, and 0.27, respectively). Although a similar trend was seen at 1.75° foveal eccentricity (Fig. 3D), it was not statistically significant (P = 0.401). 
Figure 3.
 
Mean MPOD values at various foveal eccentricities in the five age groups.
Figure 3.
 
Mean MPOD values at various foveal eccentricities in the five age groups.
The mean MPOD values in men and women at 0.25°, 0.50°, 1.00°, and 1.75° foveal eccentricities are summarized in Table 1. There were no differences between the sexes in mean MPOD until age 40 years. Between 40 to 49 years, the men had higher MPOD than the women at 0.25° (0.75 ± 0.28 in men vs. 0.62 ± 0.18 log unit in women; P = 0.039). Between 50 and 59 years of age, women had higher MPODs than men at the 0.25°, 0.50°, and 1.00° foveal eccentricities (0.57 vs. 0.71 at 0.25°; P = 0.019, 0.45 vs. 0.55 at 0.50°; P = 0.041, and 0.30 vs. 0.42 at 1.00°; P = 0.017, respectively). After 60 years, there again was no difference in mean MPOD between the sexes. 
Table 1.
 
Relationship of Mean MPOD in the Various Age Groups in Either Sex
Table 1.
 
Relationship of Mean MPOD in the Various Age Groups in Either Sex
Age Groups Sex Foveal Eccentricities
0.25° 0.50° 1.00° 1.75° ANOVA
n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P P
Overall Male 150 0.65 ± 0.24 0.428 150 0.51 ± 0.23 0.393 149 0.37 ± 0.22 0.680 145 0.21 ± 0.16 0.992 <0.0001
Female 150 0.63 ± 0.22 150 0.49 ± 0.20 150 0.37 ± 0.18 149 0.21 ± 0.15 <0.0001
20–29 Male 30 0.66 ± 0.13 0.139 30 0.54 ± 0.14 0.087 30 0.43 ± 0.15 0.075 30 0.23 ± 0.09 0.056 <0.0001
Female 30 0.60 ± 0.18 30 0.47 ± 0.18 30 0.36 ± 0.17 30 0.18 ± 0.11 <0.0001
30–39 Male 30 0.74 ± 0.25 0.704 30 0.56 ± 0.26 0.724 30 0.43 ± 0.23 0.740 30 0.22 ± 0.16 0.422 <0.0001
Female 30 0.72 ± 0.19 30 0.54 ± 0.20 30 0.42 ± 0.15 30 0.25 ± 0.13 <0.0001
40–49 Male 30 0.75 ± 0.28 0.039 30 0.56 ± 0.25 0.166 30 0.42 ± 0.22 0.383 30 0.23 ± 0.24 1.000 <0.0001
Female 30 0.62 ± 0.18 30 0.48 ± 0.20 30 0.38 ± 0.18 30 0.23 ± 0.15 <0.0001
50–59 Male 30 0.57 ± 0.21 0.019 30 0.45 ± 0.19 0.041 30 0.30 ± 0.19 0.017 30 0.18 ± 0.14 0.068 <0.0001
Female 30 0.71 ± 0.22 30 0.55 ± 0.18 30 0.42 ± 0.18 29 0.25 ± 0.16 <0.0001
≥60 Male 30 0.52 ± 0.24 0.658 30 0.43 ± 0.25 0.594 29 0.29 ± 0.23 0.668 25 0.21 ± 0.16 0.271 <0.0001
Female 30 0.49 ± 0.23 30 0.39 ± 0.21 30 0.26 ± 0.18 30 0.16 ± 0.17 <0.0001
Post hoc power calculation 94.1 75.5 94.2 14.8
The mean interocular differences were approximately 0.04 ± 0.15, 0.03 ± 0.14, 0.03 ± 0.14, and 0.02 ± 0.12 at 0.25°, 0.50°, 1.00° and 1.75° foveal eccentricities, respectively; none was statistically significant. Figure 4 shows the Bland-Altman plots obtained at the first and repeat sessions. The mean difference (±SD) in MPOD at 0.25° between the first and repeat session was 0.03 (±0.10), with a 95% confidence interval for the mean difference of 0.23 to −0.17. The mean difference (± SD) in MPOD at 0.50° between the first and repeat sessions was −0.01 (±0.11), with a 95% confidence interval for this mean difference of 0.21 to −0.24. The mean difference (±SD) in MPOD at 1.00° between the first and repeat session was 0.0 (±0.12) with a 95% confidence interval for this mean difference of 0.25 to −0.26. The mean difference (±SD) in MPOD at 1.75° between the first and repeat session was 0.0 (±0.09) with a 95% confidence interval for this mean difference of 0.19 to −0.17. Cronbach's α values for the test−retest sessions were 0.945, 0.919, 0.872, and 0.791 at 0.25°, 0.50°, 1.00°, and 1.75° foveal eccentricity, respectively. 
Figure 4.
 
Bland-Altman plots showing differences between eccentricities by average of repeat and first session of MPOD measurements.
Figure 4.
 
Bland-Altman plots showing differences between eccentricities by average of repeat and first session of MPOD measurements.
Discussion
Table 2 compares the MPOD measurement in the present study with those in other studies published in the literature. We included only studies that in which HFP was used to measure the MPOD. After statistically comparing our data with results from the other studies (approximately one half U.S.-based and the other half from other countries), we found our study to have significantly higher MPOD than that found in the U.S.-based studies 22,28,30 41 (0.50 vs. 0.32, P = 0.0027), whereas, compared with studies from other countries, 1,8,11,19,27,29,42 46 results were not significantly different (0.50 vs. 0.38, P = 0.056). This is the first report of MPOD in an Indian sample. The MPODs were higher in our Indian sample than in other studies. The difference can be attributed to higher intakes of a vegetarian diet rich in carotenoids (Hammond BR, et al. IOVS 2002;43:ARVO E-Abstract 3604). Ciulla et al. 28 have shown that individuals with brown-black irises have 19% higher MPOD than those with blue-gray irises. South Indian populations have predominantly brown-black irises, which may also explain the higher MPOD in the Indian population. 
Table 2.
 
Comparison of MPOD Values in Various Published Studies
Table 2.
 
Comparison of MPOD Values in Various Published Studies
Study Location Method Subjects (n) Age Range (y) Foveal Eccentricity Reference Target Mean MPOD ± SD (Log Units)
Werner et al.30 (1987) US HFP 50 10–90 0.50° 0.39 ± 0.04
Hammond et al.31 (1996) US HFP 34 20–62 0.50° 5.5° 0.34 ± 0.15
Hammond et al.22 (1996) US HFP 88 19–83 0.50° 5.5° 0.38 ± 0.22
Wooten et al.32 (1999) US HFP 30 16–60 0.50° 0.26 ± 0.15
Hammond et al.33 (2000) US HFP 217 17–92 0.50° 0.22 ± 0.13
Cuilla et al.28 (2001) US HFP 280 18–50 0.50° 0.21 ± 0.13
Beatty et al.11 (2001) N. Europe HFP 46 21–81 0.475° 0.29 ± 0.15
Cuilla et al.34 (2001) US HFP 24 48–82 0.50° 0.19 ± 0.11
Delori et al.35 (2001) US HFP 30 29–78 1.00° 5.5° 0.37 ± 0.26
Tang et al.19 (2004) China HFP 67 18–23 0.50° 0.48 ± 0.23
Cuilla et al.36 (2004) US HFP 29 72 ± 8 0.50° 0.28 ± 0.21
Snodderly et al.37 (2004) US HFP 54 females 50–79 0.50° 0.42 ± 0.22
Nolan et al.38 (2004) UK HFP 100 22–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.319
Liew et al.42 (2005) UK HFP 300 18–50 0.50° 5.5° 0.43 ± 0.21
Neelam et al.43 (2005) UK HFP 120 20–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.31 ± 0.15
Mares et al.44 (2006) US HFP 1698 females 53–86 0.25° 0.43 ± 0.23
Hogg et al.39 (2007) UK HFP 107 20–79 0.50° 2.5° 0.38 ± 0.18
Iannaccone et al.27 (2007) US HFP 222 69–86 0.50° 0.34 ± 0.21
Liew et al.40 (2006) UK HFP 306 18–50 0.50° 5.5° 0.44 ± 0.20
Loane et al.29 (2007) UK HFP 109 22–67 0.50° 0.39 ± 0.19
Nolan et al.45 (2007) UK HFP 828 20–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.29 ± .16
Stringham et al.8 (2008) US HFP 40 17–41 0.25° 10° 0.54 ± .25
Nolan et al.1 (2008) UK HFP 59 18–60 0.25° 0.49 ± .23
van der Veen et al.41 (2009) Netherlands HFP 5581 20–90 0.50° 0.33 ± .18
Our study South India HFP 161 20–72 0.50° 0.50 ± .21
The macular pigment level increased up to the 30- to 39-year age group and then declined at all eccentricities. Similar to our findings, Lam et al. 21 also found that the highest average MPODs were recorded in the 40- to 59-year age group. Thus, there is an increase in MPOD up to 40 years. Thereafter, we found a decline in MPOD in all age groups and in both sexes. This negative correlation of age and MPOD has been seen in other studies. 11,21,33 The age-related decline in MPOD could be due to the excessive depletion because of utilization of lutein and zeaxanthin due to the age-related increase in oxidative stress. 33,45 It could also be due to inadequate accumulation of macular carotenoids, because of age-related changes in dietary intake, absorption, and transport of serum carotenoid. 46,47 However, there are studies that show no effect of age on MPOD. 20  
Recently published studies pertaining to sex differences in MPOD are conflicting. Some studies report that males have higher MPOD than do females, 22 24 whereas others deny any relationship. 11,19,25 28 We found that the men in our study had higher MPOD than did the women in the 40- to 49-year age group. Hammond et al. 22 also reported higher MPODs in men. However, in the 50- to 59-year age group, the women had higher MPODs than did the men. These differences can be explained by hormonally controlled variations in the lipid transport system, which is used by carotenoids. 45 Steroid hormones, may also affect the metabolism of carotenoids directly. 45 Also women are known to have a higher percentage body fat, which is also known to affect MPOD. 38,45  
We found an exponential decrease in MPOD with increasing eccentricity from the fovea. Our MPOD data showed a unimodal distribution that was similar to that in HFP studies by Snodderly et al., 37 Wooten and Hammond, 48 Hammond et al., 49 Lam et al., 21 and Beatty et al. 11 Whereas, studies performed by Berendschot and van Norren, 3 Delori et al., 50 and Wolf et al. 18 showed a bimodal distribution with a central peak surrounded by a ring with high-density values of MP when they measured with fundus reflectance, autofluorescence, and modified confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy. 
We found no significant interocular difference in MPOD. This finding was consistent with those in previous reports. 21,27,45,51,52 The subjects did not show any significant difference in sex or age. Our study is unique, as it is the first report of MPOD distribution in a sample of the Indian population. This is important, as there is evidence that age-related macular degeneration is less prevalent in the Indian subcontinent. Unlike other studies, the distribution in various age groups and between the sexes was uniform in this sample. Thus, the effect of age and sex could be established in a better manner. 
The study had some limitations. Being a descriptive study, we did not examine the factors that might influence MPOD levels except age and sex. The increased level of melanin in darker eyes, especially near the fovea might alter the measurement of MPOD and provide a lower MPOD. 53 Possible artifacts that might have influenced the data include subjects who did not turn the knob themselves. In conclusion, this study establishes the MPOD normogram in an Indian sample. This information will be useful in understanding the epidemiology and presentations of age-related macular degeneration in this population. 
Footnotes
 Supported by the R. D. Tata Trust, Mumbai.
Footnotes
 Disclosure: R. Raman, None; R. Rajan, None; S. Biswas, None; K. Vaitheeswaran, None; T. Sharma, None
References
Nolan JM Stringham JM Beatty S Snodderly DM . Spatial profile of macular pigment and its relationship to foveal architecture. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:2134–2142. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Handelman GJ Dratz EA Reay CC van Kuijk JG . Carotenoids in the human macula and whole retina. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988;29:850–855. [PubMed]
Berendschot TT van Norren D . Macular pigment shows ringlike structures. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:709–714. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Trieschmann M van Kuijk FJ Alexander R . Macular pigment in the human retina: histological evaluation of localization and distribution. Eye (Lond). 2008;22:132–137. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Snodderly DM Brown PK Delori FC Auran JD . The macular pigment, I: absorbance spectra, localization, and discrimination from other yellow pigments in primate retinas. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1984;25:660–673. [PubMed]
Whitehead AJ Mares JA Danis RP . Macular pigment: a review of current knowledge. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:1038–1045. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr. Wooten BR Curran-Celentano J . Carotenoids in the retina and lens possible acute and chronic effects on human visual performance. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2001;385:41–46. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Stringham JM Hammond BR . Macular pigment and visual performance under glare conditions. Optom Vis Sci. 2008;85:82–88. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wooten BR Hammond BR . Macular pigment: influences on visual acuity and visibility. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2002;21:225–240. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Davies NP Morland AB . Macular pigments: their characteristics and putative role. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2004;23:533–559. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Beatty S Murray IJ Henson DB Carden D Koh H Boulton ME . Macular pigment and risk for age-related macular degeneration in subjects from a Northern European population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:439–446. [PubMed]
Bone RA Landrum JT Mayne ST Gomez CM Tibor SE Twaroska EE . Macular pigment in donor eyes with and without AMD: a case-control study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:235–240. [PubMed]
Obana A Hiramitsu T Gohto Y . Macular carotenoid levels of normal subjects and age-related maculopathy patients in a Japanese population. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:147–157. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bernstein PS Zhao DY Wintch SW Ermakov IV McClane RW Gellermann W . Resonance Raman measurement of macular carotenoids in normal subjects and in age-related macular degeneration patients. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1780–1787. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cuthbertson FM Peirson SN Wulff K Foster RG Downes SM . Blue light-filtering intraocular lenses: review of potential benefits and side effects. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35:1281–1297. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mainster MA Turner PL . Retinal examination and photography are safe is anyone surprised? Ophthalmology. 2010;117:197–198. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
LaRowe TL Mares JA Snodderly DM Klein ML Wooten BR Chappell R ; CAREDS Macular Pigment Study Group. Macular pigment density and age-related maculopathy in the Carotenoids in Age-Related Eye Disease Study: an ancillary study of the women's health initiative. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:876–883. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wolf-Schnurrbusch UE Röösli N Weyermann E . Ethnic differences in macular pigment density and distribution. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:3783–3787. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Tang CY Yip HS Poon MY Yau WL Yap MK . Macular pigment optical density in young Chinese adults. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2004;24:586–593. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Berendschot TT van Norren D . On the age dependency of the macular pigment optical density. Exp Eye Res. 2005;81(5):602–609. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lam RF Rao SK Fan DS Lau FT Lam DS . Macular pigment optical density in a Chinese sample. Curr Eye Res. 2005;30:799–805. [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr Curran-Celentano J Judd S . Sex differences in macular pigment optical density: relation to plasma carotenoid concentrations and dietary patterns. Vision Res. 1996;36:2001–2012. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mellerio J Ahmadi-Lari S van Kuijk F Pauleikhoff D Bird A Marshall J. , A portable instrument for measuring macular pigment with central fixation. Curr Eye Res. 2002;25:37–44. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Broekmans WM Berendschot TT Klöpping-Ketelaars IA . Macular pigment density in relation to serum and adipose tissue concentrations of lutein and serum concentrations of zeaxanthin. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76;595–603.
Curran-Celentano J Hammond BRJr Cuilla TA Cooper DA Pratt LM Daris RB . Relation between dietary intake, serum concentrations, and retinal concentrations of lutein and zeaxanthin in adults in a Midwest population. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74:796–802. [PubMed]
Burke JD Curran-Celentano J Wenzel AJ . Diet and serum carotenoid concentrations affect macular pigment optical density in 45 years and older. J Nutr. 2005;135;1208–1214. [PubMed]
Iannaccone A Mura M Gallaher KT . Macular pigment optical density in the elderly: findings in a large biracial midsouth population sample. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:1458–1465. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ciulla TA Curran-Celantano J Cooper DA . Macular pigment optical density in a midwestern sample. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:730–737. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Loane E Stack J Beatty S Nolan JM . Measurement of macular pigment optical density using two different heterochromatic flicker photometers. Curr Eye Res. 2007;32:555–564. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Werner JS Donnelly SK Kliegl R . Aging and macular pigment density. Vision Res. 1987;27:257–268. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr Wooten BR Snodderly DM . Cigarette smoking and retinal carotenoids: implications for age-related macular degeneration. Vision Res. 1996;36:3003–3009. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wooten BR Hammond BRJr Land RI Snodderly DM . A practical method for measuring macular pigment optical density. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:2481–2489. [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr Caruso-Avery M . Macular pigment optical density in a Southwestern sample. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1492–1497. [PubMed]
Ciulla TA Hammond BRJr Yung CW Pratt LM . Macular pigment optical density before and after cataract extraction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:1338–1341. [PubMed]
Delori FC Goger DG Hammond BR Snodderly DM Burns SA . Macular pigment density measured by autofluorescence spectrometry: comparison with reflectometry and heterochromatic flicker photometry. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2001;18:1212–1230. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ciulla TA Hammond BRJr . Macular pigment density and aging, assessed in the normal elderly and those with cataracts and age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;138:582–587. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Snodderly DM Mares JA Wooten BR Oxton L Gruber M Ficek T . CAREDS Macular Pigment Study Group. Macular pigment measurement by heterochromatic flicker photometry in older subjects: the carotenoids and age-related eye disease study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:531–538. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nolan J O'Donovan O Kavanagh H . Macular pigment and percentage of body fat. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:3940–3950. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hogg RE Anderson RS Stevenson MR Zlatkova MB Chakravarthy U . In vivo macular pigment measurements: a comparison of resonance Raman spectroscopy and heterochromatic flicker photometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:485–490. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Liew SH Gilbert CE Spector TD . Central retinal thickness is positively correlated with macular pigment optical density. Exp Eye Res. 2006;82:915–920. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
van der Veen RL Berendschot TT Hendrikse F Carden D Makridaki M Murray IJ . A new desktop instrument for measuring macular pigment optical density based on a novel technique for setting flicker threshold. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2009;29:127–137. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Liew SH Gilbert CE Spector TD . Heritability of macular pigment: a twin study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:4430–4436. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Neelam K O'Gorman N Nolan J . Measurement of macular pigment: Raman spectroscopy versus heterochromatic flicker photometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:1023–1032. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mares JA LaRowe TL Snodderly DM . CAREDS Macular Pigment Study Group and Investigators. Predictors of optical density of lutein and zeaxanthin in retinas of older women in the Carotenoids in Age-Related Eye Disease Study: an ancillary study of the Women's Health Initiative. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;84:1107–1122. [PubMed]
Nolan JM Stack J O' Donovan O Loane E Beatty S . Risk factors for age-related maculopathy are associated with a relative lack of macular pigment. Exp Eye Res. 2007;84:61–74. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Curran-Celentano J Burke JD Hammond BRJr . In vivo assessment of retinal carotenoids: macular pigment detection techniques and their impact on monitoring pigment status. J Nutr. 2002;132:535S–539S. [PubMed]
Loane E Nolan JM O'Donovan O Bhosale P Bernstein PS Beatty S . Transport and retinal capture of lutein and zeaxanthin with reference to age-related macular degeneration. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53:68–81. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wooten BR Hammond BRJr . Spectral absorbance and spatial distribution of macular pigment using heterochromatic flicker photometry. Optom Vis Sci. 2005;82:378–386. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr Wooten BR Snodderly DM . Individual variations in the spatial profile of human macular pigment. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1997;14:1187–1196. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Delori FC Goger DG Keilhauer C Salvetti P Staurenghi G . Bimodal spatial distribution of macular pigment: evidence of a sex relationship. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2006;23:521–538. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hammond BRJr Fuld K . Interocular differences in macular pigment density. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992;33:350–355. [PubMed]
Kanis MJ Berendschot TT van Norren D . Interocular agreement in melanin and macular pigment optical density. Exp Eye Res. 2007;84:934–938. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Berendschot TT Willemse-Assink JJ Bastiaanse M de Jong PT van Norren D . Macular pigment and melanin in age-related maculopathy in a general population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:1928–1932. [PubMed]
Figure 1.
 
Targets used at various foveal eccentricities for measuring MPOD. Target 1 for 25° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 15 min arc radius. Target 2 for 0.50° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 0.5° arc radius. Target 3 for 1.00° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 50 min arc and an outer radius of 70 min arc. Target 4 for 1.75° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 90 min arc and an outer radius of 120 min arc. Target 5 for 7° temporal eccentricity: test target of 1° radius.
Figure 1.
 
Targets used at various foveal eccentricities for measuring MPOD. Target 1 for 25° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 15 min arc radius. Target 2 for 0.50° foveal eccentricity: a solid disc of 0.5° arc radius. Target 3 for 1.00° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 50 min arc and an outer radius of 70 min arc. Target 4 for 1.75° foveal eccentricity: an annulus with an inner radius of 90 min arc and an outer radius of 120 min arc. Target 5 for 7° temporal eccentricity: test target of 1° radius.
Figure 2.
 
Frequency distribution of MPOD at the four foveal eccentricities.
Figure 2.
 
Frequency distribution of MPOD at the four foveal eccentricities.
Figure 3.
 
Mean MPOD values at various foveal eccentricities in the five age groups.
Figure 3.
 
Mean MPOD values at various foveal eccentricities in the five age groups.
Figure 4.
 
Bland-Altman plots showing differences between eccentricities by average of repeat and first session of MPOD measurements.
Figure 4.
 
Bland-Altman plots showing differences between eccentricities by average of repeat and first session of MPOD measurements.
Table 1.
 
Relationship of Mean MPOD in the Various Age Groups in Either Sex
Table 1.
 
Relationship of Mean MPOD in the Various Age Groups in Either Sex
Age Groups Sex Foveal Eccentricities
0.25° 0.50° 1.00° 1.75° ANOVA
n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P n Mean ± SD (Log Units) P P
Overall Male 150 0.65 ± 0.24 0.428 150 0.51 ± 0.23 0.393 149 0.37 ± 0.22 0.680 145 0.21 ± 0.16 0.992 <0.0001
Female 150 0.63 ± 0.22 150 0.49 ± 0.20 150 0.37 ± 0.18 149 0.21 ± 0.15 <0.0001
20–29 Male 30 0.66 ± 0.13 0.139 30 0.54 ± 0.14 0.087 30 0.43 ± 0.15 0.075 30 0.23 ± 0.09 0.056 <0.0001
Female 30 0.60 ± 0.18 30 0.47 ± 0.18 30 0.36 ± 0.17 30 0.18 ± 0.11 <0.0001
30–39 Male 30 0.74 ± 0.25 0.704 30 0.56 ± 0.26 0.724 30 0.43 ± 0.23 0.740 30 0.22 ± 0.16 0.422 <0.0001
Female 30 0.72 ± 0.19 30 0.54 ± 0.20 30 0.42 ± 0.15 30 0.25 ± 0.13 <0.0001
40–49 Male 30 0.75 ± 0.28 0.039 30 0.56 ± 0.25 0.166 30 0.42 ± 0.22 0.383 30 0.23 ± 0.24 1.000 <0.0001
Female 30 0.62 ± 0.18 30 0.48 ± 0.20 30 0.38 ± 0.18 30 0.23 ± 0.15 <0.0001
50–59 Male 30 0.57 ± 0.21 0.019 30 0.45 ± 0.19 0.041 30 0.30 ± 0.19 0.017 30 0.18 ± 0.14 0.068 <0.0001
Female 30 0.71 ± 0.22 30 0.55 ± 0.18 30 0.42 ± 0.18 29 0.25 ± 0.16 <0.0001
≥60 Male 30 0.52 ± 0.24 0.658 30 0.43 ± 0.25 0.594 29 0.29 ± 0.23 0.668 25 0.21 ± 0.16 0.271 <0.0001
Female 30 0.49 ± 0.23 30 0.39 ± 0.21 30 0.26 ± 0.18 30 0.16 ± 0.17 <0.0001
Post hoc power calculation 94.1 75.5 94.2 14.8
Table 2.
 
Comparison of MPOD Values in Various Published Studies
Table 2.
 
Comparison of MPOD Values in Various Published Studies
Study Location Method Subjects (n) Age Range (y) Foveal Eccentricity Reference Target Mean MPOD ± SD (Log Units)
Werner et al.30 (1987) US HFP 50 10–90 0.50° 0.39 ± 0.04
Hammond et al.31 (1996) US HFP 34 20–62 0.50° 5.5° 0.34 ± 0.15
Hammond et al.22 (1996) US HFP 88 19–83 0.50° 5.5° 0.38 ± 0.22
Wooten et al.32 (1999) US HFP 30 16–60 0.50° 0.26 ± 0.15
Hammond et al.33 (2000) US HFP 217 17–92 0.50° 0.22 ± 0.13
Cuilla et al.28 (2001) US HFP 280 18–50 0.50° 0.21 ± 0.13
Beatty et al.11 (2001) N. Europe HFP 46 21–81 0.475° 0.29 ± 0.15
Cuilla et al.34 (2001) US HFP 24 48–82 0.50° 0.19 ± 0.11
Delori et al.35 (2001) US HFP 30 29–78 1.00° 5.5° 0.37 ± 0.26
Tang et al.19 (2004) China HFP 67 18–23 0.50° 0.48 ± 0.23
Cuilla et al.36 (2004) US HFP 29 72 ± 8 0.50° 0.28 ± 0.21
Snodderly et al.37 (2004) US HFP 54 females 50–79 0.50° 0.42 ± 0.22
Nolan et al.38 (2004) UK HFP 100 22–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.319
Liew et al.42 (2005) UK HFP 300 18–50 0.50° 5.5° 0.43 ± 0.21
Neelam et al.43 (2005) UK HFP 120 20–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.31 ± 0.15
Mares et al.44 (2006) US HFP 1698 females 53–86 0.25° 0.43 ± 0.23
Hogg et al.39 (2007) UK HFP 107 20–79 0.50° 2.5° 0.38 ± 0.18
Iannaccone et al.27 (2007) US HFP 222 69–86 0.50° 0.34 ± 0.21
Liew et al.40 (2006) UK HFP 306 18–50 0.50° 5.5° 0.44 ± 0.20
Loane et al.29 (2007) UK HFP 109 22–67 0.50° 0.39 ± 0.19
Nolan et al.45 (2007) UK HFP 828 20–60 0.50° 5.5° 0.29 ± .16
Stringham et al.8 (2008) US HFP 40 17–41 0.25° 10° 0.54 ± .25
Nolan et al.1 (2008) UK HFP 59 18–60 0.25° 0.49 ± .23
van der Veen et al.41 (2009) Netherlands HFP 5581 20–90 0.50° 0.33 ± .18
Our study South India HFP 161 20–72 0.50° 0.50 ± .21
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×