Literature DB >> 16996593

Gaze changes with binocular versus monocular viewing in age-related macular degeneration.

Stamatina A Kabanarou1, Michael D Crossland, Caren Bellmann, Angela Rees, Louise E Culham, Gary S Rubin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine and explain gaze changes during binocular versus monocular viewing in patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-nine patients with bilateral late-stage AMD.
METHODS: Distance acuity and fundus pathologic features were evaluated. Eye position was recorded while viewing a circular fixation target under monocular and binocular viewing conditions using an infrared eye tracker (SMI Gazetracker, SensoMotoric, Germany; Eyelink Software 2.04). Gaze changes were quantified by calculating the mean x-coordinate and y-coordinate eye position of the center of the bivariate contour ellipse area for a 30-second fixation task under both viewing conditions. Retinal loci used for monocular fixation for each eye were determined using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO; SLO 101, Rodenstock, Munich, Germany). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Gaze position.
RESULTS: Nine patients showed no shift in gaze position from monocular to binocular viewing. Three patients demonstrated a shift in both eyes, and 17 patients demonstrated a shift in only 1 eye. The mean shift was 4.7+/-5 degrees (standard deviation). The shift in gaze position in the worse eye was predictive of the distance between the 2 monocular preferred retinal loci (PRLs; better and worse eye; r(2) = 0.59; P<0.0001), whereas there was no association between the shift in gaze position in the better eye and distance (r(2) = 0.00; P = 0.91).
CONCLUSIONS: Most AMD patients shift gaze position in 1 or both eyes when viewing binocularly compared with monocularly. These changes suggest that different retinal locations are used for fixation under the 2 viewing conditions. The SLO data showed that these patients are likely to demonstrate monocular PRLs that fall on noncorresponding areas. These results may have implications for the effective development of eccentric viewing and binocular behavior of AMD patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16996593     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.06.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  23 in total

1.  DLP-based dichoptic vision test system.

Authors:  Russell L Woods; Henry L Apfelbaum; Eli Peli
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  Impact of Wet Macular Degeneration on the Execution of Natural Actions.

Authors:  Muriel Boucart; Celine Delerue; Miguel Thibaut; Sebastien Szaffarczyk; Mary Hayhoe; Thi Ha Chau Tran
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  The Preferred Retinal Locus Used to Watch Videos.

Authors:  Francisco M Costela; Sidika Kajtezovic; Russell L Woods
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Clinical usefulness of binocular multifocal electroretinography in patients with monocular macular disease.

Authors:  Jee Wook Kim; Youn Joo Choi; Seung Yup Lee; Kyung Seek Choi
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-06-28

5.  Monocular and binocular smooth pursuit in central field loss.

Authors:  Natela Shanidze; Stephen Heinen; Preeti Verghese
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Dependence of reading speed on letter spacing in central vision loss.

Authors:  Susana T L Chung
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  Volume perimetry: measurement in depth of visual field loss.

Authors:  Premnandhini Satgunam; Henry L Apfelbaum; Eli Peli
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  Predicting Stereopsis in Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Preeti Verghese; Saeideh Ghahghaei
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Comparing the fixational and functional preferred retinal location in a pointing task.

Authors:  Brian Sullivan; Laura Walker
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Binocular contrast summation and inhibition depends on spatial frequency, eccentricity and binocular disparity.

Authors:  Concetta F Alberti; Peter J Bex
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2018-09-16       Impact factor: 3.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.