Back

Lens Thickness and Its Association with General and Ocular Parameters in Healthy Subjects

Cao, Y.; Liao, F.; He, Y.; Huang, Y.; Zhou, L.; Kong, X.

2022-04-17 ophthalmology
10.1101/2022.04.11.22273740 medRxiv
Show abstract

The crystalline lens lens thickness playing an essential role in maintaining normal visual function, but little attention is paid to the lens thickness. The purpose of this study is to document the normative values of lens thickness (LT) in healthy subjects of Southern China and to evaluate its associated factors. This was a prospective, clinic-based, observational, cross-sectional study. A total of 526 eyes from 263 healthy subjects aged between 5-84 years (mean age, 38.48 {+/-} 22.04 years) were included in the study. All subjects underwent detailed ophthalmic examination, including the measurement of ocular biometric parameters by LenStar LS900. The study focused on LT and its association with general and ocular factors. The generalized estimation equation (GEE) model was used for statistical analysis. The Mean LT was 4.01 {+/-} 0.57 mm(95% CI, 3.97 - 4.06; median, 3.94 mm; range, 3.10 - 5.36). In a univariate regression analysis, the LT was associated significantly age, body weight, body height, body mass index (BMI), systolic pressure, diastolic pressure, spherical equivalent (SE), intraocular pressure (IOP), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and axial length (AL) (all P<0.05). After adjusting the general parameters and ocular parameters, LT was associated significantly with age ({beta}, 0.0151; 95% CI, 0.0116 - 0.0186; P<0.001), gender ({beta}, 0.1233; 95% CI, 0.0553 - 0.1913; P<0.001) and ACD ({beta}, -0.5815; 95% CI, -0.8059 - -0.3571; P<0.001) using the multivariate regression model. The LT was associated with older age, female gender, and shallower ACD in healthy subjects from Southern China. The data may help understand ocular diseases concerning lens thickness.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.