Advertisement

Authors’ reply to: Using anterior segment optical coherence tomography to compare the smoothness of anterior iris surface between two eyes in unilateral Fuchs’ uveitis syndrome

  • Muhammet Derda OzerEmail author
  • Fatih Kebapcı
  • Muhammed Batur
  • Erbil Seven
  • Serek Tekın
Letter to the Editor (by invitation)
  • 277 Downloads

We thank Zarei M et al. for the comments on our article [1].

Iris changes are well-known features of Fuchs’ uveitis syndrome (FUS). Diffuse iris atrophy without hypochromia is reported as 49% in a large longitudinal study [2]. However, the decision on diffuse atrophy existence in this study has been made by observation not based on quantitative analysis. The studies that conducted for analysis of iris thickness of FUS quantitatively have shown decreased iris thickness (IT) in the affected eye compared with the healthy fellow eye [3, 4]. In our study, we could not have found a statistically significant difference between the IT of both eyes having unilateral FUS, and we concluded that this might be due to racial differences in iris morphology or patient selection.

Zarei M et al. have noticed the conflicting results about the IT differences of unilateral FUS cases in the literature and would like to offer a new parameter, smoothness index, to overcome this controversial [5]. Since the flattening of the iris crypts is found in 81% of our FUS cases, we think that the smoothness index might be a useful parameter in distinguishing the affected eyes from the healthy eyes. However, we have some concerns about the image acquisition technique for calculation of this parameter. We have noticed that the images which were addressed by the authors are acquired from dilated eyes. Dilation of pupil might lead to altered iris crypts due to its flexible structure resembling an accordion. So, we suggest them to pay attention to the fact that the pupil of the evaluated patients is in miotic state at the time of anterior segment OCT image acquisition.

Again, we would like to thank Zarei M et al. for the interest shown in our study and for raising this point in a letter to the editor.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Ozer MD, Kebapci F, Batur M, Seven E, Tekin S (2019) In vivo analysis and comparison of anterior segment structures of both eyes in unilateral Fuchs’ uveitis syndrome. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 257:1489–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tugal-Tutkun I, Guney-Tefekli E, Kamaci-Duman F, Corum I (2009) A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of Fuchs uveitis syndrome in Turkish patients. Am J Ophthalmol 148(4):510–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Basarir B, Altan C, Pinarci EY, Celik U, Satana B, Demirok A (2013) Analysis of iris structure and iridocorneal angle parameters with anterior segment optical coherence tomography in Fuchs’ uveitis syndrome. Int Ophthalmol 33:245–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Invernizzi A, Cigada M, Savoldi L, Cavuto S, Fontana L, Cimino L (2014) In vivo analysis of the iris thickness by spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Br J Ophthalmol 98:1245–1249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cho KH, Park SJ, Cho JH, Woo SJ, Park KH (2016) Inner-retinal irregularity index predicts postoperative visual prognosis in idiopathic epiretinal membrane. Am J Ophthalmol 168:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Medicine, Ophthalmology DepartmentVan Yuzuncu Yil UniversityVanTurkey

Personalised recommendations