Sex differences in ocular biometric measurements: A twin study

0Citations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: Gender differences in ocular biometric measurements of opposite-sex and same-sex twin pairs are still unclear. We aimed to investigate the difference between ocular biometric measurements in adolescent twin pairs. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included a total of 64 eyes of 64 adolescents from 32 twins. The ocular biometric measurements and refractive prediction error (RE) were acquired from four groups of dizygotic (DZ) twins: boys from same-sex twin-pairs (SSM, n = 20), boys from opposite-sex twin-pairs (OSM, n = 8), girls from opposite-sex twin-pairs (OSF, n = 8), and girls from same-sex twin-pairs (SSF, n = 29). Results: The mean age of the patient was 9.92 ± 2.84 (range: 6–18) years. Overall, boys had higher height, AL, WTW, but lower Ks, and Kf than girls (p < 0.05). Specifically, SSF was found to have the lowest lens thickness (LT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), white to white (WTW), and axial length (AL) levels, while the highest keratometry readings in the flat (Kf) and steep (Ks) levels compared with OSM, OSF, and SSM adolescents (p < 0.05). Compared with the OSF adolescents, ACD levels of the SSF adolescents were significantly lower [(2.99 ± 0.35) and (3.26 ± 0.15) mm, p = 0.033)], but Kf indicator was significantly larger [(43.93 ± 1.64) and (42.91 ± 1.75), p = 0.016)]. Conclusion: Our study indicates that there was a significant difference in ocular biometric measurements between twin pairs, and sharing the uterus with a DZ twin SSF has smaller ocular indicator measurements. Our findings provide information on the eyeball and refractive development in adolescents.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, H., Zhou, J., Yang, L., Zhang, X., Shi, W., Yang, H., … Li, H. (2022). Sex differences in ocular biometric measurements: A twin study. Frontiers in Medicine, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.936738

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free