The Relationship between Carotid Intima-Media Thickness and Ocular Circulation in Type-2 Diabetes

Table 3

Comparison of previous reports.

Studies	Subjects	Number of eyes	95% CI	Major findings of IMT
Momeni et al. [11]	DR vs. NDR	154	DR: 0.95 (0.91–0.99) NDR: 0.73 (0.71–0.75)	IMT-Cmax was significantly higher in DR than in NDR
Kocaoglu et al. [32]	DR vs. NDR vs. control	85	DR: 0.9 (0.84–0.96) NDR: 0.8 (0.74–0.86) Control: 0.7 (0.65–0.75)	IMT was significantly higher in DR than in NDR, but showed no significant difference between NDR and controls
Saif et al. [33]	PDR vs. NPDR	140	PDR: 1.094 (1.062–1.126) NPDR: 0.842 (0.810–0.874)	Mean IMT was significantly higher in PDR than in NPDR
Rema et al. [34]	DR vs. NDR	590	DR: 0.93 (0.86–1.00) NDR: 0.85 (0.83–0.87)	Mean IMT was significantly higher in DR than in NDR
Current study	NDR vs. Mild NPDR	129	Mild NPDR: 1.00 (0.83–1.17) NDR: 0.77 (0.70–0.84)	IMT-Cmax was significantly higher in mild NPDR than in NDR

DR = diabetic retinopathy; NPDR = nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy; CI = confidence interval; IMT = intima-media thickness. 95% CI of each previous report was calculated from mean, standard deviation, and sample size shown in the paper.