Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Increase in Bruch’s membrane opening minimum rim width with age in healthy children: the Hong Kong Children Eye Study
  1. Xiu Juan Zhang1,
  2. Shu Min Tang1,2,
  3. Yu Meng Wang1,
  4. Yuzhou Zhang1,
  5. Hei-Nga Chan1,
  6. Yi Han Lau1,
  7. Ka Wai Kam1,3,
  8. Poemen P Chan1,4,
  9. Patrick Ip5,
  10. Alvin L Young1,3,
  11. Clement C Tham1,3,4,6,7,
  12. Li Jia Chen1,3,7,
  13. Chi Pui Pang1,7,
  14. Jason C Yam1,3,4,6,7
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
  2. 2Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fujian, China
  3. 3Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China
  4. 4Hong Kong Eye Hospital, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR
  5. 5Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, LKS Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR
  6. 6Department of Ophthalmology, Hong Kong Children Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China
  7. 7Hong Kong Hub of Paediatric Excellence, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
  1. Correspondence to Dr Jason C Yam, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong; yamcheuksing{at}cuhk.edu.hk

Abstract

Background/aims To identify normative values and determinants for Bruch’s membrane opening (BMO) and the minimum rim width of BMO (BMO-MRW) among healthy children.

Methods A population-based cross-sectional study from the Hong Kong Children Eye Study, recruiting 1, 226 children aged 6–8 years. Spherical refractive error, axial length (AL), body mass index and intraocular pressure (IOP) were measured. The optic nerve head and the peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (p-RNFL) were imaged through spectral domain-optical coherence tomography, using 24 equally spaced radial B-scans. Global and sectoral BMO-MRW values, BMO area and fovea-to-BMO (FoBMO) angle were calculated. Multiple regression analysis was performed to define the determinants of BMO area and BMO-MRW in relation to demographic and ocular parameters.

Results The mean values for global BMO-MRW, BMO area and FoBMO angle among children were 345.76±54.08 µm, 2.34±0.49 mm2 and −5.45±4.36°, respectively. Global and sectoral values for BMO-MRW correlated with p-RNFL thickness (r=0.11–0.35, p<0.001). After adjusting for demographic and ocular parameters, global BMO-MRW increased with age (β=6.4, p<0.001) and greater global p-RNFL thickness (β=1.41, p<0.001), but decreased with larger BMO area (β=−47.46, p<0.001) and higher IOP (β=−1.73, p<0.001). Global BMO-MRW did not associate with AL, whereas both BMO area and FoBMO angle associated with AL (β=0.04, p=0.02 and β=0.31, p=0.03, respectively), but not with age.

Conclusion We observed that BMO-MRW increases with age among children. Our results provide normative values and the determinants of BMO parameters among Chinese children.

  • Child health (paediatrics)
  • Optic Nerve

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • XJZ, SMT and YMW are joint first authors.

  • Contributors XZ carried out the data collection, analysis, and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and wrote the main manuscript. SMT carried out the data collection, analysis, and interpretation and edited the main manuscript. YMW carried out the data collection, analysis, and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and edited the main manuscript. YZ carried out the data analysis and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and edited the main manuscript. H-NC carried out the data collection, analysis and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures and edited the main manuscript. YHL carried out the data analysis and interpretation and edited the main manuscript. KWK carried out the data collection and interpretation and critically revised the main manuscript. PPC carried out the data analysis and interpretation and reviewed the main manuscript. PI carried out the data interpretation and critically revised the main manuscript. ALY carried out the data collection and interpretation and critically revised the main manuscript. CCT carried out the data collection and interpretation and critically revised the main manuscript. LJC carried out the data collection, analysis and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and critically revised the main manuscript. C-PP carried out the data collection, analysis and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and critically revised the main manuscript. JCY conceived the study, carried out the data collection, analysis and interpretation, prepared the tables and figures, and critically revised the manuscript. JCY, as the guarantor, accepts full responsibility for the study, access to the data and piblication.

  • Funding This study was supported in part by the General Research Fund (GRF), Research Grants Council, Hong Kong (14111515 and 14103419 (JCY)); Collaborative Research Fund (C7149-20G (JCY)); Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF), Hong Kong (5160836, (LJC) and 07180826 (XZ)) and the Direct Grants of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, (4054193 (LJC) and 4054121 and 4054199 (JCY) and 4054634 (XZ)), the Innovation and Technology Fund (7010590 (JCY)), the UBS Optimus Foundation Grant 8984 (JCY); the Centaline Myopia Fund (JCY); the CUHK Jockey Club Children’s Eye Care Programme(No grant number, (JCY)); and the CUHK Jockey Club Myopia Prevention Programme (No grant number, (JCY)).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.