Abstract
Aims To report the anatomical characteristics of wide-based foveal pit and its associations with macular diseases.
Methods Wide-based foveal pit was defined as a foveal base width (FBW) larger than the mean value plus one standard deviation of normal population. Eyes with a wide-based foveal pit were retrospectively collected as the study group, and age- and sex-matched subjects with a normal FBW were recruited as the control group. FBW, area of foveal avascular zone (FAZ) and retinal artery trajectory (RAT) were compared between two groups. The characteristics of the fellow eyes in the study group were also described.
Results Fifty two eyes from 52 patients were identified as having a wide-based foveal pit; 43 (82.7%) were female. Both their FBW (474.7 ± 84.6μm) and area of FAZ (0.50 ± 0.11mm2) were significantly larger than in the control group (297.6 ± 42.3 μm and 0.29 ± 0.10 mm2, respectively; p < 0.001 for both), and they also had a wider RAT than the control group (p < 0.001). During follow-up, three eyes had developed idiopathic epiretinal membrane. As for their fellow eyes, they either also had a wide-based foveal pit (11 eyes) or had various macular diseases including idiopathic epiretinal membrane (27 eyes), macular hole (5 eyes) and others (16 eyes).
Conclusions Eyes with a wide-based foveal pit also had a large FAZ and a wide RAT, and they might have a predisposition to idiopathic epiretinal membrane formation. Their fellow eyes also had a predisposition to epiretinal membrane and macular hole.
Synopsis Eyes with a wide-based foveal pit had a predisposition to idiopathic epiretinal membrane formation. Their fellow eyes might also have a wide-based foveal pit and had a predisposition to epiretinal membrane and macular hole.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee and Institutional Review Board of National Taiwan University Hospital.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos