Discussion
Among UK Biobank participants with visual impairment, VRIA were identified as the most likely, primary cause of visual impairment in 3.6% of eyes, and the prevalence of any VRIA was 17.6% in the eyes with visual impairment and 8.1% of the eyes without visual impairment.
The overall prevalence of VRIA in this study, for the eyes with and without visual impairment, is comparable to other studies. In the population-based Beijing Eye Study, the prevalence of ERM was 2.2% per eye, based on grading of fundus photographs alone.6 In other population-based studies and using a combination of fundus photographs and slit-lamp examination, Miyazaki et al
7 and McCarty et al
8 reported ERM prevalence figures of 4.0% and 6%, respectively. With time domain OCT and fundus photography, the Handan Eye Study recorded a prevalence of 3.4% for ERM alone.9 With the benefit of spectral domain OCT, Fusi-Rubiano et al
10 reviewed the OCT images from consecutive patients attending a retina clinic and reported a prevalence of 7.3% for any VRIA. However, almost 40% of the cases in that series had vitreomacular adhesion alone. In an urban Chinese population, Liu et al
11 reported a prevalence of 16.8% for any VRIA among adults without eye disease, excluding eyes with posterior vitreous detachment alone. Meuer et al
12 reported a prevalence of 39.7% for any VRIA, excluding macular and paravascular cysts, among the residents of Beaver Dam.
Differences between the VRIA prevalence reported here and other published series are likely to be the result of differing VRIA definitions, methods of ascertainment of pathology and the population characteristics. In keeping with more recent studies that used spectral domain OCT imaging, this study included a variety of subtypes of VRIA. As reported in the Beaver Dam study, the data presented here illustrates the superiority of spectral domain OCT over fundus photography in identifying both ERM and FTMH.12 Other VRIA, such as VMT and foveoschisis, would not be expected to be identifiable on colour fundus photography. Several studies have shown that the prevalence of ERM and other VRIA increases with age, the presence of other retinal pathology, prior cataract surgery and myopia.7 9 11 12 In this study of UK Biobank participants, the prevalence of VRIA in the eyes with visual impairment was at least twice that in the eyes without. The mean age of the participants studied here was 61 years, compared with 74 years in the Beaver Dam study, and other retinal disease was identified in over 20% of the eyes with visual impairment and a VRIA.
Among UK Biobank participants, ERM and VMT were the most common VRIA causing visual impairment, but the visual acuity with these abnormalities was typically better than for partial or full-thickness macular holes and foveoschisis. Fusi-Rubiano et al
10 reported a decrease in visual acuity as the grade of VRIA changed from VMT to FTMH. The same study also identified that many eyes with VMT did not have visual impairment. The data presented in this article illustrate that VRIA were more common in the eyes with visual impairment but were also present in 8% of the eyes without visual impairment, using the predetermined LogMAR acuity >0.3 to define visual impairment. Mean visual acuity in the eyes in the Beaver Dam study with both epiretinal membrane and partial-thickness macular hole was better than this threshold.12 Similarly, in the series reported by Fusi-Rubiano et al, the majority of eyes with VMT retained good visual acuity and there was a large range of visual acuities recorded for each VRIA, with the possible exception of FTMH.10 Some of the eyes with VRIA in the UK Biobank also had visual acuity levels better than LogMAR 0.3 but worse than LogMAR 0.0.
Increasing age, female sex and Asian ethnicity were significant associations with visual impairment and VRIA among UK Biobank participants using multivariable analysis, even though cases and controls were matched by age, sex and ethnicity. With each additional decade, the prevalence of VRIA was 22% greater for the cases with a VRIA in one or both eyes than for the controls without visual impairment. For female cases with VRIA, the prevalence of VRIA was 28% greater than for the controls. The associations of VRIA with increasing age and female sex have been reported before and are likely to reflect the trend for detachment of the posterior hyaloid with increasing age and female sex.9 11 13 The association with Asian ethnicity, but not other ethnic minority status, may be a consequence of the high prevalence of myopia in this group.9 14 No association was seen with other variables, including serum cholesterol, diabetes mellitus and smoking status, that have previously been reported as being positively associated with a range of VRIA.7 11 However, medication for cholesterol, diabetes mellitus and smoking status were found to be associated with visual impairment at the 5% level on univariate analysis and were included in the initial multivariable model.
The image quality of the colour fundus photographs reviewed for this study was variable but the quality of the OCT images was much better, with only 3.7% of all the OCT images judged to be ungradeable. By comparison, in the Beaver Dam study, OCT images from 9% of eyes were excluded because the image was either missing or ungradeable.12 In the Beijing Eye study, 5.5% of OCT images were felt to be of insufficient quality for grading.15
This pilot study has a number of strengths and potential weaknesses. The UK Biobank was one of the first to use spectral domain OCT imaging and over 65 000 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this study. Many of the key findings in relation to the prevalence of VRIA and the level of associated visual impairment are consistent with other studies. Images were graded by experienced clinicians and graders. Although there must be some uncertainty about the identification of VRIA as the primary cause of visual impairment, the deformation of the retinal architecture was greater in the eyes with VRIA identified as the primary cause than in the eyes with VRIA as an incidental finding. Furthermore, the degree of visual impairment was typically mild or moderate for most VRIA and especially for VMT and ERM. However, the UK Biobank study is not a population-based study and the response rate to the invitation to participate was low.1 Participants were generally healthier, older, more affluent and more likely to be urban than the full UK population and so may not be representative.14 16 As a result, the prevalence figures reported here may not be applicable to the wider UK population and are likely to be minimum estimates.17 This pilot study involved image grading for a representative sample of only 25% of the participants with visual impairment and not all of the fellow eyes without visual impairment were included. The lack of association with other previously reported variables on multivariable analysis may also suggest that this study was underpowered. The prevalence of VRIA in the control population without visual impairment is also not known.
VRIA are common findings in middle-aged adults in the UK Biobank study, both in eyes with and without mild visual impairment or worse, and many eyes have more than one interface abnormality. VRIA were identified as the most likely, primary cause of visual impairment in 3.6% of eyes, with ERM and VMT the most common diagnoses leading to visual impairment. Visual impairment with VRIA was positively associated with increasing age, female sex and Asian or Asian British ethnicity.