Author response: can vascular function be assessed by the interpretation of retinal vascular diameter changes?

Rebekka Heitmar*, Andrew Blann, Robert Peter Cubbidge, Gregory Lip, Doina Gherghel

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter, comment or opinion

Abstract

A protocol with repeated stimulation cycles should be analyzed stepwise, in that each stimulation is evaluated, and a reaction pattern is identified. No two subjects will react identically, in that dilation and recovery times can vary; however, this is not reason enough to abandon a multiple stimulation cycle with fixed recovery and stimulation times. Furthermore, it enables us to examine and determine the range in which a normal subject will be placed and can then be compared to different pathophysiological states (i.e., smokers and different diseases). The purpose of our paper was to highlight the importance of evaluating these different cycles and the danger of false interpretation when averaging results. There are many different ways of evaluating dilatory responses and elasticity, but each of them must be carefully evaluated and should not be overaveraged, which can result in a loss of sensitivity and specificity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)636-638
Number of pages3
JournalInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science
Volume52
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2011

Bibliographical note

Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Author response: can vascular function be assessed by the interpretation of retinal vascular diameter changes?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this