Batı Türkiye'de pinguecula prevalansı ve ilişkili faktörler

Year 2020, Volume: 13 Issue: 3, 795 - 802, 18.09.2020

Hüseyin Dundar Can Kocasarac

https://doi.org/10.31362/patd.704119

Abstract

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada Ege bölgesindeki pingeukula
prevalansı ve ilişkili risk faktörleri tanımlamak amaçlandı.

Yöntemler: Çalışmaya Ocak 2018 ile Ekim 2019 tarihleri
arasında 20 yaş üstü 1443 katılımcı dahil edildi. Biomikroskopik muayene ile
pinguekula varlığı kaydedildi. Temel demografik verileri, mesleki aktivite,
eğitim düzeyi, alkol tüketimi ve sigara kullanımı, kuru göz anketi ve diyabet
veya hipertansiyon gibi sistemik bozuklukları sorgulayan bir anket uygulandı.

Bulgular: Pinguekula prevalansı % 52.5 olarak tespit
edildi. Pinguekula prevalansı erkeklerde (% 58.4) kadınlardan (% 46.8) daha
yüksekti. Pinguekula prevalansında yaşla birlikte anlamlı derecede artış
saptandı (p <0.001). Dış mekanda çalışma, 2 saatten fazla güneşe maruz kalma
ve azalmış gözyaşı parçalanma süresi (TBUT) değerleri ile pinguekula
prevalansının arttığı tespit edildi. Pinguekula prevalansının eğitim seviyesi
arttıkça azaldığı belirlendi.

Sonuç: Pinguekula prevalansı, önceki çalışmalara
göre dünya çapında büyük farklılıklar göstermektedir. Bu, Türkiye'de pinguekula
prevalansını araştıran ilk çalışmadır. Bizim prevalans oranımız önceki
calışmalarin ortalamalarına yakın bulunmuştur . Yaş, cinsiyet, güneşe maruz
kalma süresi, TBUT değerleri ve eğitim düzeyi pinguekula prevalansı ile
ilişkili bulunmuştur.

Keywords

Pinguecula, Prevalans, Türkiye

Supporting Institution

yok

Prevelance and associated factors of pinguecula in western Turkey

Abstract

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to describe the prevalence
and factors associated with pinguecula in the western part of Turkey.

 

Methods: The study included 1443 participants over the
age of 20 between January 2018 and October 2019. The presence of pinguecula on
slit lamp examination was recorded. A structured questionnaire which includes
basic demographic data, occupational activity, educational level, alcohol
consumption and smoking, dry eye questionnaire and systemic disorders such as
diabetes or hypertension was applied.

 

Results: The prevalence of pinguecula was
52.5%.Pinguecula prevalence was higher in males (58.4%) than females (46.8%).The
prevalence of pinguecula significantly increased with age (p<0.001). Outdoor
working, more than 2 hours of sun exposure and decreased tear break-up time
(TBUT) values increase the prevalence rate of pinguecula. The pinguecula
prevalence decreases as the level of education increases.

 

Conclusion: The prevalence of pinguecula varies highly
around the world according to the previous studies. This is the
first study which investigates the prevalence of pinguecula in Turkey.Our prevalence rate falls in the mid range.
Age, gender, duration of sun exposure, TBUT values and education level are
found to be related to the pinguecula prevalence.

Keywords

Pinguecula, prevelance, Turkey

References

• 1. Taub MB. Ocular effects of ultraviolet radiation. Optometry Today. 2004;44:34–38.
• 2. Mimura T, Usui T, Obata H, Yamagami S, Mori M, Funatsu H, Noma H, Dou K, Amano S. Severity and determinants of pinguecula in a hospital-based population. Eye Contact Lens. 2011;37:31-35.
• 3. Oguz H, Karadede S, Bitiren M, Gürler B, Çakmak M.Tear functions in patients with pinguecula. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2001;79:262-265.
• 4. Soliman W, Mohamed TA. Spectral domain anterior segment optical coherence tomography assessment of pterygium and pinguecula. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90:461-465.
• 5. Dong N, Li W, Lin H, et al. Abnormal epithelial differentiation and tear film alteration in pinguecula. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:2710-2715. 6. Jaros PA, DeLuise VP. Pingueculae and pterygia. Surv Ophthalmol. 1988;33:41-49.
• 7. Panchapakesan J, Hourihan F, Mitchell P. Prevalence of pterygium and pinguecula: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol 1998;26: 2–5.
• 8. Pham TQ, Wang JJ, Rochtchina E, Mitchell P. Pterygium/ pinguecula and the five-year incidence of age-related maculopathy. Am J Ophthalmol 2005; 139: 536–537.
• 9.Viso E, Gude F, Rodríguez-Ares MT. Prevalence of pinguecula and pterygium in a general population in Spain.Eye (Lond). 2011;25:350-357.
• 10. Rezvan F, Hashemi H, Emamian MH, Kheirkhah A, Shariati M, Khabazkhoob M, Fotouhi A.The prevalence and determinants of pterygium and pinguecula in an urban population in Shahroud, Iran. Acta Med Iran. 2012;50:689-696.
• 11. Asokan R, Venkatasubbu RS, Velumuri L, Lingam V, George R. Prevalence and associated factors for pterygium and pinguecula in a South Indian population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012;32:39-44.
• 12. Fotouhi A, Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Mohammed K. Prevalence and risk factors of pterygium and pinguecula: the Tehran Eye Study. Eye (Lond). 2009 May;23:1125-1129.
• 13. Peiretti E, Dessì S, Putzolu M, Fosarello M. Hyperexpression of low-density lipoprotein receptors and hydroxy-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A-reductase in human pinguecula and primary pterygium. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:3982-3985.
• 14. Nakaishi H, Yamamoto M, Ishida M, Someya I, Yamada Y. Pingueculae and pterygia in motorcycle policemen. Ind Health. 1997 ;35:325-329.
• 15. Li ZY, Wallace RN, Streeten BW, Kuntz BL, Dark AJ. Elastic fiber components and protease inhibitors in pinguecula. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991;32:1573-1585.
• 16. Lee ET, Russell D, Morris T, et al. Visual impairment and eye abnormalities in Oklahoma Indians. Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:1699–1704.
• 17. Norn MS. Spheroid degeneration, pinguecula, and pterygium among Arabs in the Red Sea territory, Jordan. Acta Ophthalmol 1982;60:949–954.
• 18. Norn MS. Prevalence of pinguecula in Greenland and in Copenhagen, and its relation to pterygium and spheroid degeneration. Acta Ophthalmol 1979;57:96–105.
• 19.Le Q, Xiang J, Cui X, Zhou X, Xu J.Prevalence and associated factors of pinguecula in a rural population in Shanghai, Eastern China.Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2015;22:130-138.
• 20. Coroneo M. Ultraviolet radiation and the anterior eye. Eye Contact Lens 2011;37:214–224.
• 21. Dundar H, Kocasarac C.Relationship Between Contact Lens and Pinguecula.Eye Contact Lens. 2019:45;390-393
• 22. Küçük E, Yılmaz U, Zor K.R. Corneal Epithelial Damage and Impaired Tear Functions in Patients with Inflamed Pinguecula. J Ophthalmol. 2018;31:2018:2474173.
• 23 .Balogun M.M., Ashaye A.O., Ajayi B.G., Osuntokun O.O. Tear break-up time in eyes with pterygia and pingueculae in Ibadan. West African Journal of Medicine. 2005;24:162–166.