Despite the observed asymmetric border tissue configuration changes, no significant changes in ASCO and BMO areas and ovalities were found in this study. Consistent with our findings, Jnawali et al.
28 did not find a significant correlation between AL and BMO area in myopic and nonmyopic children (mean age, 11.12 ± 2.64 years). Similarly, the distance between opposite BMO points, which could be considered as a surrogate measure of BMO area, did not change during myopia progression.
30 Furthermore, only 25 of 46 eyes (54.3%) showed increased disc ovality in the Boramae Myopia Cohort Study.
30 However, these findings are in contrast with other studies reporting a significantly smaller
54 or larger
55–60 optic disc area in myopic eyes. These contradicting findings might signify a wide inter-subject variability in myopic ONH remodeling.
30 An age-dependent remodeling of the myopic ONH
48,49 may underlie the controversial results across studies, where no significant changes in ASCO and BMO areas were seen in our study and in myopic children,
28,30 but found in adult eyes.
55–59 Furthermore, the variability between studies could be aggravated by a poor agreement between ONH parameters measured with different imaging devices, including fundus photography, Heidelberg Retinal Tomography, and OCT.
61–66 Because there is no consensus on the definition of optic disc margin, different results for optic disc area and ovality should be interpreted carefully. The clinically visible optic disc margin in fundus photography does not usually match the innermost margin of BMO obtained by OCT imaging.
62,66 Therefore, the BMO area obtained by fundus photography
55,57–59 might be overestimated and should be interpreted carefully when compared with other OCT-obtained BMO areas. Furthermore, results may be affected by the segmentation technique, where fully automated, semiautomated, or manual segmentation strategies can yield different results.
63,64 The cumulative effects of interactions with age, inherent differences of imaging devices, and ONH margin delineation methods across studies may explain the controversial results in the optic disc area and ovality changes reported in different myopia studies.