RESUMO
Purpose. To assess the different check sizes of pattern visual evoked potential (PVEP) in diabetic patients without retinopathy according to HbA1c levels and diabetes duration. Methods. Fifty-eight eligible patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 26 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were included in the study. Only the right eye of each patient was analyzed. All of the patients underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic examination, and the PVEPs were recorded. Results. There was a statistically significant difference in P100 latency in 1-degree check size and in N135 latency in 2-degree check size between controls and patient groups which have different HbA1c levels. There were statistically significant, positive, and weak correlations with diabetes duration and P100 latency in 7-minute and 15-minute check sizes and N135 latency in 15-minute check size. Conclusions. It was showed that there were prolongations in P100 latency only in 1-degree check size and in N135 only in 2-degree check size in diabetic patients without retinopathy. There was statistically significant correlation between diabetes duration and P100 and N135 latencies in different check sizes.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement of corneal thickness (CT) measurements obtained by the Pentacam Scheimpflug camera, noncontact specular microscopy (SM), and ultrasonographic pachymetry (UP) in diabetic (DM) patients; and whether duration of diabetes and level of Hb A1c affect the agreement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CT was measured in 127 patients with DM, and 137 age and sex-matched healthy controls sequentially by Pentacam, SM, and UP. Also diabetic subjects were subdivided according to duration of diabetes and Hb A1c levels. Pearson correlation analysis, linear regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots were used for examination of agreement. RESULTS: We found an excellent and statistically significant correlation of CT measurements between Pentacam-SM (R2 = 0.768; R2 = 0.855), Pentacam-UP (R2 = 0.546; R2 = 0.652), and SM-UP (R2 = 0.759; R2 = 0.797) in diabetic and control groups, respectively. We performed further comparisons of the pair of instruments using the Bland-Altman analysis, and the mean difference between pair of methods was much smaller for SM-UP pair (-4.20 ± 9.79 in diabetic, and -4.58 ± 8.08 in control group). The group having Hb A1c level less than 7.5% showed the best agreement between SM-UP pair as in the control group. Whereas Pentacam-UP showed the best agreement in the group having Hb A1c level ≥7.5%. The best agreement was between Pentacam-UP in 0-4 year group, and between Pentacam-SM in 5-9 year and ≥10 year groups. CONCLUSION: SM-UP pair showed a higher agreement in diabetic patients. According to subgroup analyses, Hb A1c level, rather than the duration of diabetes, may determine the agreement of these pachymetry devices. But the difference in CT measurements between devices can still influence clinical diagnosis and treatment. Therefore, these methods are not completely interchangeable.
