June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Comparison of macular pigment optical density measured by autofluorescence and reflectometry: the LIMPIA Study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Catherine Garcher
    Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Dijon, France
    Eye and Nutrition Research Group, UMR CSGA-1324 INRA-6265 CNRS-Université de Bourgogne-AgroSup, Dijon, Dijon, France
  • Marie-Noelle Delyfer
    Ophthalmology, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
    Univ. Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897-Epidemiologie-Biostatistique, Bordeaux, France
  • Marie Rougier
    Ophthalmology, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  • Hélène Savel
    Unité de soutien méthodologique à la recherche clinique et épidémiologie (USMR), Pôle de Santé Publique, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  • Geneviève Chêne
    Unité de soutien méthodologique à la recherche clinique et épidémiologie (USMR), Pôle de Santé Publique, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  • Cecile Delcourt
    INSERM, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897-Epidemiologie-Biostatistique, Bordeaux, France
    Unité de soutien méthodologique à la recherche clinique et épidémiologie (USMR), Pôle de Santé Publique, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
  • Jean-Francois Korobelnik
    Ophthalmology, CHU Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
    Univ. Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897-Epidemiologie-Biostatistique, Bordeaux, France
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Catherine Garcher, Alcon (C), Allergan (C), Baush and Lomb (C), Bayer Pharma (C), Novartis (C), Laboratoire Théa (C); Marie-Noelle Delyfer, Thea Laboratories (F); Marie Rougier, THEA (C), Bausch&Lomb (C), Allergan (C), Kemin (C); Hélène Savel, None; Geneviève Chêne, None; Cecile Delcourt, Laboratoires Théa (F), Novartis (C), Bausch+Lomb (C); Jean-Francois Korobelnik, Alcon (C), Allergan (C), Bayer (C), Carl Zeiss Meditec (C), Novartis (C), Thea (F)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 3781. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Catherine Garcher, Marie-Noelle Delyfer, Marie Rougier, Hélène Savel, Geneviève Chêne, Cecile Delcourt, Jean-Francois Korobelnik; Comparison of macular pigment optical density measured by autofluorescence and reflectometry: the LIMPIA Study. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):3781. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To compare macular pigment optical density (MPOD) measured by two techniques (autofluorescence, reflectometry) in healthy subjects at high risk for age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

Methods: The Limpia Study is a double-blind, placebo controlled, prospective randomized clinical trial performed in 120 subjects with at least one parent affected by neovascular AMD. To be included, subjects had to be aged 40-70 years, have best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) greater than 20/25, be free of late AMD and other major eye conditions (severe glaucoma, high myopia, severe retinal disease, cataract surgery…). Subjects having used supplements containing lutein and/or zeaxanthin in the preceding year were not included. MPOD was measured using two methods: the two-wavelength autofluorescence method with a modified scanning laser ophthalmoscope (Heidelberg Retinal Analyzer (HRA), Heidelberg, Germany) and a method based on reflectometry (Visucam200 MPD, Carl ZeissMeditec, Germany).

Results: At baseline, mean MPOD within 0.51°, measured with the modified HRA method, was 0.5 ± 0.2. Maximal MPOD, measured with Visucam, was 0.4 ± 0.1. Parameters from the modified HRA (optical density within 0.5°, 1°, 2° and 6°) and from the Visucam method (volume, area, mean and maximum optical density) were weakly correlated. The best correlations were observed for MPOD within 2° and 6° with volume from Visucam (r=0.21 and r=0.22, respectively), and mean MPOD from Visucam (r=0.21 and r=0.18).

Conclusions: The two methods propose different parameters to evaluate macular pigment, which overall correlated weakly in this population of middle-aged healthy subjects at high risk for AMD. Further research is needed to characterize the differences between the methods and identify the best parameters and techniques to measure macular pigment.

Keywords: 587 macular pigment • 465 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques • 412 age-related macular degeneration  
×
×

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.

×