Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 251

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Human Chorioretinal Layer Thicknesses Measured in Macula-wide, High-Resolution Histologic Sections

Open access
Curcio, Christine A., Messinger, Jeffrey D., Sloan, Kenneth R., Mitra, Arnab, McGwin, Gerald, Spaide, Richard F.·2011·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: To provide a comprehensive description of chorioretinal layer thicknesses in the normal human macula, including two-layer pairs that can produce a combined signal in some optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices (ganglion cell [GCL] and inner plexiform [IPL] layers and outer plexiform [OPL] and outer nuclear [ONL] layers). METHODS: In 0.8-μm-thick, macula-wide sections through the foveola of 18 donors (age range, 40-92 years), 21 layers were measured at 25 locations by a trained observer and validated by a second observer. Tissue volume changes were assessed by comparing total retinal thickness in ex vivo OCT and in sections. RESULTS: Median tissue shrinkage was 14.5% overall and 29% in the fovea. Histologic laminar boundaries resembled those in SD-OCT scans, but the shapes of the foveolar OPL and ONL differed. Histologic GCL, IPL, and OPLHenle were thickest at 0.8. to 1, 1.5, and 0.4 mm eccentricity, respectively. ONL was thickest in an inward bulge at the foveal center. At 1 mm eccentricity, GCL, INL, and OPLHenle represented 17.3% to 21.1%, 18.0% to 18.5%, and 14.2% to 16.6% of total retinal thickness, respectively. In donors ≥ 70 years of age, the RPE and choroid were 17.1% and 29.6% thinner and OPLHenle was 20.8% thicker than in donors <70 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the first graphic representation and thickness database of chorioretinal layers in normal macula were generated. Newer OCT systems can separate GCL from IPL and OPLHenle from ONL, with good agreement for the proportion of retinal thickness occupied by OPLHenle in OCT and histology. The thickening of OPLHenle in older eyes may reflect Müller cell hypertrophy associated with rod loss.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.10-6377

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 251

Metadata

Authors
Curcio, C. A., Messinger, J. D., Sloan, K. R., Mitra, A., McGwin, G., & Spaide, R. F.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2011-06-02
Volume
52
Issue
7
Pages
3943
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
OpenAlex
W2061477205
Cited by
251
References
5
FWCI
15.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.