Literature DB >> 17488463

Comparison of two pupillometers in determining pupil size for refractive surgery.

Sander Bootsma1, Nayyirih Tahzib, Fred Eggink, John de Brabander, Rudy Nuijts.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare a handheld and a digital pupillometer in determining pupil size in a population of refractive surgery candidates (group 1) and after implantation of an Artisan phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) for correction of myopia (group 2).
METHODS: Pupil size was measured with the Colvard and Procyon pupillometers in 121 eyes in group 1 and 83 eyes in group 2. Pupil sizes measured with the Colvard device were compared with the scotopic, mesopic-low and mesopic-high measurements taken with the Procyon pupillometer in both groups. Analysis of comparison between pupil measurements was performed according to methods described by Bland and Altman.
RESULTS: The mean Colvard scotopic pupil diameter, scotopic, mesopic-low and mesopic-high Procyon pupil diameters were 5.86 +/- 0.81 mm, 6.42 +/- 0.88 mm, 5.55 +/- 0.95 mm and 4.21 +/- 0.73 mm in group 1 and 5.32 +/- 0.67 mm, 6.14 +/- 0.81 mm, 5.33 +/- 0.78 mm and 4.02 +/- 0.55 mm in group 2, respectively. The Colvard diameter compared most favourably with the Procyon mesopic-low diameter (group 2; p = 0.78).
CONCLUSIONS: Measurements of pupil diameter with the Colvard pupillometer correlated best with measurements taken by the Procyon pupillometer under standardized mesopic-low light conditions. We believe that digital binocular infrared pupillometry is advantageous for obtaining standardized measurements of pupil size.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17488463     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2006.00823.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand        ISSN: 1395-3907


  8 in total

1.  Suitability of open-field autorefractors as pupillometers and instrument design effects.

Authors:  Carles Otero; Mikel Aldaba; Oriol Ferrer; Andrea Gascón; Juan C Ondategui-Parra; Jaume Pujol
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Predictive value of pupillography on intraoperative floppy iris syndrome in preoperative period.

Authors:  Gozde Sahin Vural; Mehmet Vural
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Can we measure mesopic pupil size with the cobalt blue light slit-lamp biomicroscopy method?

Authors:  Miguel J Maldonado; Alberto López-Miguel; David P Piñero; José R Juberías; Juan C Nieto; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01-08       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy of aMCI in the Elderly: Combination of Olfactory Test, Pupillary Response Test, BDNF Plasma Level, and APOE Genotype.

Authors:  Yuda Turana; Teguh Asaat S Ranakusuma; Jan Sudir Purba; Nurmiati Amir; Siti Airiza Ahmad; Moh Hasan Machfoed; Yvonne Suzy Handayani; Sarwono Waspadji
Journal:  Int J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2014-02-02

5.  Analysis of various factors affecting pupil size in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Ji Woong Park; Bong Hui Kang; Ji Won Kwon; Kyong Jin Cho
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-09-16       Impact factor: 2.209

6.  The effect evaluation of advanced penlight.

Authors:  Piao-Yi Chiou; Chih-Yin Chien; Yi-Horng Lai; Chang Feng Chun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Evaluation of static and dynamic Pupillometry changes in men using Silodosin for benign prostatic hypertrophy.

Authors:  Umut Karaca; Engin Kaya; Onder Ayyildiz; Gokhan Ozge; Murat Kucukevcilioglu; Gulsah Usta; Fatih Mehmet Mutlu
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  Static and Dynamic Pupil Characteristics in Myopic Anisometropic Amblyopia.

Authors:  Hasan Kiziltoprak; Kemal Tekin; Esat Yetkin; Mehmet Ali Sekeroglu
Journal:  Beyoglu Eye J       Date:  2020-07-29
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.