Sectoral and Quadrant Evaluation of the Peripapillary Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer and Ganglion Cell–inner Plexiform Layer Thickness in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

Emine Rabia Koç1, Esin Söğütlü Sarı2, Alper Yazıcı3, Furkan Sarıdaş1, Ömer Faruk Turan1

1Bursa Uludag University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Bursa, Türkiye
2Bursa Uludag University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology, Bursa, Türkiye
3Private Batigöz Hospital, Clinic of Ophthalmology, Izmir, Türkiye

Keywords: Multiple sclerosis, optical coherence tomography, ganglion cell layer, retinal fiber layer

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) and ganglion cell–inner plexiform layer thickness (GC–IPL) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) by sector and quadrant.

Materials and Methods: Seventy-eight eyes of 39 patients with MS and 82 eyes of 41 healthy participants were analyzed using spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Our study defined MS eyes with optic neuritis (ON) as MS ON eyes and those without ON as MS non-ON eyes. Comparisons of the GC– IPL and pRNFL thicknesses were assessed and the measurements compared with healthy controls (HCs).

Results: The comparison of the average and three quadrants (superior, inferior, and temporal) measurements of the pRNFL thickness and the average and six quadrant measurements of the GC–IPL thickness between the MS ON eyes and the MS non-ON eyes revealed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). The average and four quadrants thickness of pRNFL and the average and six quadrants thickness of GC–IPL were significantly reduced in a comparison of MS ON vs. HC with MS non-ON vs. HC eyes (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The evaluation of pRNFL and GC–IPL thicknesses in MS ON and MS non-ON eyes may be beneficial in determining the central nervous system axonal integrity.

Ethics Committee Approval

Balikesir University Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Ethics Committee (decision no: 2013- 026, date: 19.06.2013).

Peer Review

Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions

Concept: F.S., Design: E.R.K., F.S., Data Collection or Processing: E.S.S., F.S., Analysis or Interpretation: Ö.F.T., E.R.K., A.Y., Literature Search: E.R.K., A.Y., Writing: E.R.K.

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.

Financial Disclosure

The authors declared that this study received no financial support.