The correlation of acoustic and morphometric parameters of the optic nerve and anthropometric data in healthy young people

Purpose: to study the correlation between the acoustic and morphometric parameters of the optic nerve (ON) and anthropometric data in healthy young people.
Material and methods. The research involved 24 healthy volunteers (48 eyes), including 9 men and 15 women, the average age was 25.0 ± 1.9 years. Anthropometry included measurements of height, weight, and body mass index (BMI). Ultrasound examination of the retrobulbar part of the ON included measurement of the thickness of the ON with and without sheath, echodensitometry of the ON, and ocular biometry. Using optical coherence tomography, we measured the intraocular part of the ON, including the registration of Bruch's membrane opening and ovality index.
Results. The average ON thickness with the sheath was 4.6 ± 0.3 mm, and without sheath, 2.6 ± 0.2 mm. In men, ON with the sheath was thicker than in women (p = 0.001). The acoustic density of the parenchyma of the orbital part of ON was 101.2 ± 11.4 r.u. in women, the mean acoustic density of the ON was significantly higher than that in men. Correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation between the height and the thickness of the ON with the sheath (r = 0.480). The strongest reliable correlation was established between the index of the ON thickness and body weight (r = 0.712) and BMI (r = 0.509) (p < 0.05). No statistically significant correlation was found between the morphometric parameters of the optic disc, anthropometry data and acoustic parameters of the ON.
Conclusion. Studying the acoustic and morphometric characteristics of the intraocular and intraorbital parts of the ON in healthy young people, which included anthropometric data and gender characteristics, will contribute to the development more accurate diagnostic criteria of ON state evaluations.

1. Eliseeva E.K., Neroev V.V., Zueva M.V., Tsapenko I.V., Zakharova M.N. Optic neuritis with multiple sclerosis (review of literature and own data). Point of View. East — West. 2018; 2: 112–5 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.25276/2410-1257-2018-2-112-115

2. Katz D.M., Trobe J.D. Is there treatment for nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. Curr. Opin. Ophthalmol. 2015; 26 (6): 458–63. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000199

3. B uerle J., Schuchardt F., Schroeder L., et al. Reproducibility and accuracy of optic nerve sheath diameter assessment using ultrasound compared to magnetic resonance imaging. BMC neurology. 2013; 13:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-13-187

4. Lagr ze W.A., Lazzaro A., Weigel M., et al. Morphometry of the retrobulbar human optic nerve: comparison between conventional sonography and ultrafast magnetic resonance sequences. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007. 48 (5): 1913–7. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.06-1075

5. Liu H., Zhou H.-F., Zong L.-X, et al. China MRI histogram texture feature analysis of the optic nerve in the patients with optic neuritis. Chin. Med. Sci. J. March. 2019; 34 (1): 18–23. https://doi.org/10.24920/003507

6. Siebler M. Neuro-orbital ultrasound. Manual of Neurosonology. 2016: 300. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107447905.031

7. Green R.L., Byrne S.F. Diagnostic ophthalmic ultrasound. Basic science, inherited retinal disease and tumors. Retina. 2006; 1 (4): 265. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-02598-0.50020-3

8. Goeres P., Zeiler F.A., Unger B., Karakitsos D., Gillman L.M. Ultrasound assessment of optic nerve sheath diameter in healthy volunteers. J. Crit. Care. 2016; 31 (1): 168–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.10.009

9. Neroev V.V., Eliseeva E.K., Zueva M.V., et al. Demyelinating optical neuritis: correlation of data of optical coherence tomography and multifocal electroretinography. Annals of clinical and experimental neurology. 2014. 8 (2): 22–6 (in Russian).

10. Zakharova M.A., Kuroedov A.V. Optic coherent tomography – technology which became a reality. RMJ. Clinical ophthalomology. 2015; 4: 204–11 (in Russian).

11. Oluseyi K.Y.H., Ukamaka I. Ultrasonograhic measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter in normal adults. Annals of International Medical and Dental Research. 2017; 3 (2): 30–4. https://doi.org/10.21276/aimdr.2017.3.2.RD9

12. Neroev V.V., Kiseleva T.N., eds. Ultrasound in ophthalmology: a guide for doctors. 1st ed. Moscow: IKAR; 2019 (in Russian).

13. Kim D.H., Jun J.S., Kim R. Ultrasonographic measurement of the optic nerve sheath diameter and its association with eyeball transverse diameter in 585 healthy volunteers. Scientific reports. 2017; 7 (1): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-16173-z

14. Chen H., Ding G.S., Zhao Y.C., Yu R.G., Zhou J.X. Ultrasound measurement of optic nerve diameter and optic nerve sheath diameter in healthy Chinese adults. BMC Neurol. 2015; 15 (1): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-015-0361-x

15. Goeres P., Zeiler F. A., Unger B., Karakitsos D., Gillman L. M. Ultrasound assessment of optic nerve sheath diameter in healthy volunteers. J. Crit. Care. 2016; 31 (1): 168–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.10.009

16. Wang L., Feng L., Yao Y., .et al. Ultrasonographic evaluation of optic nerve sheath diameter among healthy Chinese adults. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2016; 42 (3): 683–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.11.020

17. Bauerle J., Lochner P., Kaps M., Nedelmann M. Intra- and interobserver reliability of sonographic assessment of the optic nerve sheath diameter in healthy adults. J. Neuroimaging. 2012; 22 (1): 42–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6569.2010.00546.x

18. Maude R.R., Hossain M.A., Hassan M.U., et al. Transorbital sonographic evaluation of normal optic nerve sheath diameter in healthy volunteers in Bangladesh. PLoS One. 2013; 8 (12): e 81013. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081013

19. Lochner P., Cantello R., Brigo F., et al. Transorbital sonography in acute optic neuritis: a case-control study. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2014; 35 (12): 2371–5. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4051

20. Chihara E., Chihara K. Covariation of optic disc measurements and ocular parameters in the healthy eye. Graefe’s Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 1994; 232 (2): 265–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00194475

21. Oliveira C. Harizman N., Girkin C. A., et al. Axial length and optic size in normal eyes. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007; 91 (1): 37–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2006.102061

22. Nakanishi H., Suda K., Yoshikawa M., et al. Association of Bruch’s membrane opening and optic disc morphology to axial length and visual field defects in eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2018; 256 (3): 599–610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-017-3874-8

23. Nangia V., Matin A., Bhojwani K., et al. Optic disc size in a population-based study in central India: the Central India Eye and Medical Study (CIEMS). Acta ophthalmologica. 2008; 86 (1): 103–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00964.x

24. Chauhan B.C., Danthurebandara V.M., Sharpe G.P., et al. Bruch's membrane opening minimum rim width and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in a normal white population: a multicenter study. Ophthalmology. 2015; 122 (9): 1786–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.06.001

25. Zhao X.J., Jiang H.-Y., Li Y.-H., et al. Correlations between the optic nerve head morphology and ocular biometrics in highly myopic eyes. International journal of ophthalmology. 2018; 11 (6): 997–1001. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2018.06.17

26. Guo Y., Liu L.J., Xu L., et al. Optic disc ovality in primary school children in Beijing. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2015; 56 (8): 4547–53. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-16590

27. Zhuravleva A.N., Kiseleva O.A., Kirillova M.O. Personalized medicine in glaucoma management. 2019; 12 (3): 95–100 (in Russian)]. https://doi.org/10.21516/2072-0076-2019-12-3-95-100