Other studies focusing on the natural progression of GA found GA growth best describable by a linear enlargement of the lesion radius.
37 However, concentric growth rates differ with growth accelerated in the parafovea with a significant decrease outside the macula.
38 This finding is in agreement with the decelerated growth of GA in larger lesions.
39 In addition, stacked RPE cells may build up at the immediate border of GA and contribute to the appearance of various hyperautofluorescence patterns and associated changes in growth rates.
40 Although significant in qualitative assessments, our group found only a partial association between quantitative autofluorescence and GA progression in solitary GA.
32 Compared to the cited studies, the study presented here investigated topographic differences based on the topographic distribution of SDD. Different to the recent report of the AREDS2 study group,
9 our results revealed no faster growth of multifocal than of unifocal lesions. This might be due to the large number of unifocal lesions in this study (54 eyes against 29 eyes). Previously reported prevalence of multifocal lesions revealed a much higher number of multifocal lesions, even more when including coalescent multifocal lesions.
26 The number of unifocal GA in this study is higher, because patients that convert from intermediate to atrophic AMD in the early and intermediate AMD study at the Vienna Clinical Trial Center are switched to the study investigated here. Therefore the prevalence of smaller, unifocal lesions are high in this investigation, and coalescence is more infrequent. However, our current study did not primarily investigate the differences between lesion types, but rather SDD as part of the pathomechanism of GA progression. Because this might not represent the exact proportion in atrophic AMD, this has to be accepted as a limitation of the study. This study investigated the impact of SDD on GA growth; however, we did not quantify the amount of SDD. This could nevertheless be of benefit for understanding SDD, and AI might be best suited to automatically detect, count, and quantify SDD in further analyses.
41 For the purpose of this study, we did not differentiate between growth towards the periphery and the fovea, which has already been shown to be different in eyes with GA sparing the fovea.
42 We do not consider this to have a strong impact on the results of this study because growth is slow towards the fovea (one tenth of the growth towards the periphery
42). Furthermore, ocular magnification may differ inter-individually, which may alter area measurements. Therefore the stated values might not be absolute, which has to be accepted as a limitation. The involvement of choroidal and choriocapillary vessel changes in the pathophysiology of GA was reported
4,43; however, this additional issue was not part of this study's investigation. Future studies will have to combine vascular changes with OCT structural findings. The exploratory subgroup analysis of this study included the investigation of eight topographic sections and we decided not to correct for multiple testing. Because these exploratory model were computed eight times, the possibility of an error due to multiple comparison is existent and must be accepted as a limitation.