Literature DB >> 12739174

Comparison of three different technologies for pupil diameter measurement.

Sabine Schmitz1, Frank Krummenauer, Sebastian Henn, H Burkhard Dick.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The pupil diameter plays an important role in the occurrence of photopic phenomena after refractive surgery. Standardized estimation can be performed using a lens system with a built-in millimeter scale (Colvard, Oasis Medical, California). A new computerized technique allows dynamic and binocular measurement of the pupil diameter by use of infrared light (P2000SA, Procyon Instruments, London, UK). An additional approach is a wavefront aberrometer based on the Hartmann-Shack principle (WASCA; Asclepion-Meditec-Zeiss, Jena, Germany). These strategies were compared.
DESIGN: Non-randomized comparative trial. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The pupil diameter of 56 eyes of 28 probands (18 female, mean age 23 years) was measured under scotopic conditions by three independent examiners with each measurement device. The measurement devices were compared intraindividually by pairwise sign tests. Description was based on the intraindividual differences' medians and quantiles.
RESULTS: Median pupil diameters were 6.67 mm for the scale pupillometer (interquartile range 6.07-6.94 mm), 6.60 mm for the dynamic pupillometer (6.0-7.02 mm), and 6.37 mm for the wavefront-based aberrometer (5.9-6.7 mm). Pairwise comparison revealed statistically significant ( P<0.05), although not clinically relevant median deviations. Although no clinically relevant median differences were observed (when based on intraobserver means), deviations for single pupil diameter assessments ranged up to 1 mm.
CONCLUSION: No clinically relevant median deviations were observed in the underlying repeated measurement scenario. The scale pupillometer showed greater interobserver variation than the objective tests.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12739174     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-003-0669-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  11 in total

1.  Agreement and repeatability of pupillometry using videokeratography and infrared devices.

Authors:  B S Boxer Wachler; R R Krueger
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Scotopic measurement of normal pupils: Colvard versus Video Vision Analyzer infrared pupillometer.

Authors:  E M Schnitzler; M Baumeister; T Kohnen
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Effect of preoperative pupil measurements on glare, halos, and visual function after photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy.

Authors:  W W Haw; E E Manche
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.351

Review 4.  The importance of pupil size in optical quality measurements following radial keratotomy.

Authors:  R A Applegate; K A Gansel
Journal:  Refract Corneal Surg       Date:  1990 Jan-Feb

5.  Preoperative measurement of scotopic pupil dilation using an office pupillometer.

Authors:  M Colvard
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  The effects of ablation diameter on the outcome of excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy. A prospective, randomized, double-blind study.

Authors:  D P O'Brart; M C Corbett; C P Lohmann; M G Kerr Muir; J Marshall
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1995-04

7.  Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and astigmatism: safety and efficacy: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Authors:  Alan Sugar; Christopher J Rapuano; William W Culbertson; David Huang; Gary A Varley; Peter J Agapitos; Vincent P de Luise; Douglas D Koch
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Effect of pupillary dilation on corneal optical aberrations after photorefractive keratectomy.

Authors:  C E Martínez; R A Applegate; S D Klyce; M B McDonald; J P Medina; H C Howland
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1998-08

9.  Effect of light on the prevalence of simple anisocoria.

Authors:  B L Lam; H S Thompson; R C Walls
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Photorefractive keratectomy for myopia with a 6-mm beam diameter.

Authors:  S I Shah; P S Hersh
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  1996 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  6 in total

1.  Measurements of anterior segment parameters using three different non-contact optical devices in keratoconus patients.

Authors:  Ahmet Taylan Yazıcı; Gökhan Pekel; Ercüment Bozkurt; Yusuf Yıldırım; Evre Pekel; Ahmet Demirok; Omer Faruk Yılmaz
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Corneal white-to-white distance and mesopic pupil diameter.

Authors:  Hasan Basri Cakmak; Nurullah Cagil; Huseyin Simavli; Sabri Raza
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-08-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Digital Pupillometry in Normal Subjects.

Authors:  Annekatrin Rickmann; Maria Waizel; Sara Kazerounian; Peter Szurman; Helmut Wilhelm; Karl T Boden
Journal:  Neuroophthalmology       Date:  2016-10-03

4.  The Reliability, Validity, and Normative Data of Interpupillary Distance and Pupil Diameter Using Eye-Tracking Technology.

Authors:  Nicholas P Murray; Melissa Hunfalvay; Takumi Bolte
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2017-07-03       Impact factor: 3.283

5.  Differences in pupillary light reflex between optic neuritis and ischemic optic neuropathy.

Authors:  Yung Ju Yoo; Jeong-Min Hwang; Hee Kyung Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Pupil dynamics after in-the-bag versus anterior and retropupillary iris-fixated intraocular lens implantation.

Authors:  Yanxiu Sun; Maximilian Hammer; Timur M Yildirim; Ramin Khoramnia; Gerd U Auffarth
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.