PubMed · 13923972
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J USHIYAMA, C M BROOKS. 1961. Relation between accommodation and minimal gradient.. https://doi.org/10.3181/00379727-108-26984
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND, MATERIAL AND METHODS: Down's syndrome is the most common cause of mental retardation with an incidence of about 1.5/1000 live births. Life expectancy and quality of life have improved substantially for this group over the last decades. The aim of this paper is to give an updated short survey of ocular changes present in Down's syndrome based on current international literature and the clinical experience of the authors. RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION: Ocular problems are common, mostly refractive errors, poor accommodation, strabismus, cataract, and keratoconus. Accommodation deficit is present in a majority of individuals with Down's syndrome, also in children and young people. Bifocal or progressive glasses should therefore be prescribed liberally. Because of the high frequency of ocular pathology, all individuals with Down's syndrome should be enrolled in a continuous visual screening programme from birth. We suggest the following screening guidelines: first examination at one month of age, then at one year of age, at 2-3 years of age, at 5-6 years of age (school start), and thereafter every five years. In case of positive findings (e.g. refractive errors, poor accommodation, strabismus) the frequency of examination should be increased and determined individually by the responsible ophthalmologist.
PURPOSE: Although a posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens provides effective refractive correction of high myopia and hyperopia, mechanical contact between the implantable contact lens (ICL) and the crystalline lens and inadequate aqueous circulation in the prelenticular space could cause subcapsular opacification. To assess whether and to what extent such mechanical contact occurs, changes in the distance between the STAAR Collamer ICL and the crystalline lens under various conditions were investigated. DESIGN: Open pilot study. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen eyes of 11 myopic and 2 hyperopic patients with a mean age of 38 years (range, 19-53 years) were examined at least 6 months after ICL implantation. METHODS: A noninvasive, high-resolution biometry technique, partial coherence interferometry, was used to measure distance changes between the ICL and the crystalline lens during subjective accommodation, after instillation of pilocarpine, and under changing light conditions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean distance changes from the posterior corneal surface to the ICL, from the posterior corneal surface to the anterior surface of the crystalline lens, and the distance between the ICL and the crystalline lens. RESULTS: In the nonaccommodated state, the mean distance between the ICL and the crystalline lens was 457 microm (range, 123-924 microm). During subjective accommodation, a significant (P<0.01) decrease and, after topical application of pilocarpine, a nonsignificant (P=0.35) decrease of anterior chamber depth was accompanied by a nonsignificant (P = 0.71) reduction of the ICL-crystalline lens distance. Under photopic conditions, a significant mean reduction (P<0.01) of the ICL-crystalline lens distance of -28 microm (range, -16 to -188 microm) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Partial coherence interferometry biometry enabled noninvasive high-precision investigation of ICL dynamics. No significant changes between the ICL and the crystalline lens were detected during subjective accommodation and after application of pilocarpine. However, under photopic conditions, with constriction of the pupil, the distance between the ICL and the crystalline lens was significantly reduced. This mechanism might cause inadequate aqueous circulation in the prelenticular space and might be one of the causes of subcapsular opacification in some of the eyes after ICL implantation.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical results of implantation of the new 1CU accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) in cataract patients and to compare results with those of conventional IOLs. DESIGN: Nonrandomized comparative trial. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty eyes of 20 patients (mean age = 65.8+/-13.3 years) in the 1CU group and 20 eyes of 20 patients (mean age = 67.4+/-11.6 years) in the control group. METHODS: All patients underwent phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. The 1CU accommodative lens was used in 20 eyes, and conventional IOLs (polymethyl methacrylate, hydrophilic or hydrophobic acrylate) were used in the control group. Patients were observed prospectively, and 6-month data were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accommodative ranges determined by 3 different methods (near point, defocusing, and retinoscopy). Secondary outcome measures were (1) increase of anterior chamber depth after topical application of 1% cyclopentolate eyedrops and (2) distance-corrected near visual acuity with Birkhäuser reading charts at 35 cm. RESULTS: We observed a higher accommodative range with all 3 methods (mean = 1.83+/-0.49 vs. 1.16+/-0.27 diopters [D] [near point], 1.85+/-0.43 vs. 0.64+/-0.21 D [defocusing], and 0.98+/-0.55 vs. 0.17+/-0.22 D [retinoscopy]), a larger increase of anterior chamber depth after cyclopentolate eyedrops (mean = 0.42+/-0.18 vs. 0.11+/-0.06 mm), and better distance-corrected near visual acuity (median = 0.4 vs. 0.2) in the 1CU group relative to the control group. All differences between the 2 groups were statistically highly significant (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, the 1CU accommodative IOL showed increased accommodative range and better near visual acuity than a control group with conventional IOLs. Further research is necessary to confirm these results in masked, randomized, prospective studies and to confirm further the accommodative power of this group of new IOLs.