Diagnostic Classification of Bruch's Membrane Opening-Minimum Rim Width and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness in...

Purpose: This study was conducted in order to compare the diagnostic classification of Bruch's membrane opening-minimum rim width (BMO-MRW) and RNFL thickness in normal myopic subjects by using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 75 healthy myopic subjects [spherical equivalent (SE) ≤ -0.5D] from April 2019 to January 2020. One eye of each subject was randomly selected for examination. BMO-MRW and peripapillary RNFL thickness were measured by spectral-domain OCT (Spectralis, Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany). All the subjects were divided into three groups: low myopic group (SE > -3D), moderate myopic group (-6D < SE ≤ -3D), and high myopic group (SE ≤ -6D). A nonparametric test was used to analyze the difference among groups. Linear regression was used to analyze the relationship between BMO-MRW/RNFL thickness and axial length/spherical equivalent. McNemar test was used to compare the diagnostic classification between BMO-MRW and RNFL thickness. Results: The RNFL thickness classified a significantly higher percentage of eyes as outside normal limits/borderline in at least 1 quadrant (BMO-MRW, 4%; RNFL thickness, 34.67%; p < 0.01). There was no significant correlation between BMO-MRW/RNFL thickness and AL/SE. The low myopia (SE > -3D) had a significantly lower percentage of eyes classified as outside normal limits/borderline in at least 1 quadrant than the moderate myopia (-6D < SE ≤ -3D) and high myopia (SE ≤ -6D) (low myopia, 12.5%; moderate/high myopia, 42.42%/50%; p < 0.05). Conclusion: BMO-MRW had a lower percentage of eyes classified as outside normal limits/borderline in at least 1 quadrant than RNFL thickness in normal myopic subjects. When referring to the diagnostic classification of RNFL thickness in myopic subjects, caution should be exercised in interpreting positive results. Further studies are needed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of these two measurements in myopic glaucoma patients.