Literature DB >> 22186225

Effects of lenses with different power profiles on eye shape in chickens.

Tudor Cosmin Tepelus1, Daniel Vazquez, Anne Seidemann, Dietmar Uttenweiler, Frank Schaeffel.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Defocus imposed to the periphery of the visual field can affect the development of foveal/central refractive errors. To make use of this observation, lenses can be designed to reduce myopia progression, but it is important to know which power profiles of the lenses are most effective. We have studied this question in chickens.
METHODS: Sixty male white leghorn chickens were used. From day 7 after hatching, they were treated for 5 days either with full field -7D or +7D lenses, with -7D lenses with a 4mm central hole, with hemi-field lenses of the same power, or with two different types of radial refractive gradient (RRG) lenses with increasing positive power from the center to the periphery, which were designed by Rodenstock GmbH, Munich, Germany. A macro file was written for "ImageJ" to trace and average the outlines of several excised eyes after treatment. Shapes of fellow control eyes and lens-treated eyes were compared in the horizontal and vertical meridians. Refractions were determined at -45°, 0°, and 45° over the horizontal visual field, at the beginning and at the end of experiments, using automated infrared photoretinoscopy.
RESULTS: (1) Eye length, as determined by the new automated eye shape tracing technique, was well correlated with A-scan ultrasound data. (2) The effects of previously tested lens designs were reproduced with the new tracing technique. Full field lenses were by far the most effective (-7D: external axial length +0.24mm with an increase in eye volume of about 6%, +7D: -0.08 mm, with a decrease in eye volume of about 2%). Hemi-field lenses and negative lenses with a 4mm central hole induced conspicuous local changes in eye shape. (3) The first type of RRG lenses with a plano zone of about 4mm (equivalent to about ± 12.52° in the visual field for a vertex distance of 5mm) had no apparent effect on central refractions but induced small hyperopic shifts in the periphery, more significant in the temporal retina (+1.70 ± 1.70 D, p<0.001, paired t-test to untreated fellow eyes). The second type of RRG lenses with a small plano zone of 2mm (equivalent to ± 6.34°) induced peripheral hyperopia but also changed the central refraction (temporal retina +1.50 ± 1.17D, p<0.001, central retina +0.77 ± 1.15 D, p<0.01, nasal retina +1.47±1.35D, p<0.001, paired t-test to untreated control eyes).
CONCLUSIONS: In the afoveate chick, RRG lenses have an effect on central refraction and eye growth only if the central plano zone is small (<4mm). For the second type of RRG lens with a central plano zone of about 2mm, inhibitory effects on eye growth were detected in both the center and periphery even though the optical power of the lenses in the periphery was low.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22186225     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.11.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  12 in total

Review 1.  Optical treatment strategies to slow myopia progression: effects of the visual extent of the optical treatment zone.

Authors:  Earl L Smith
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.467

Review 2.  The chick eye in vision research: An excellent model for the study of ocular disease.

Authors:  C Ellis Wisely; Javed A Sayed; Heather Tamez; Chris Zelinka; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman; Andy J Fischer; Colleen M Cebulla
Journal:  Prog Retin Eye Res       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 21.198

3.  Bifocal & Atropine in Myopia Study: Baseline Data and Methods.

Authors:  Juan Huang; Donald O Mutti; Lisa A Jones-Jordan; Jeffrey J Walline
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.973

4.  Visually guided chick ocular length and structural thickness variations assessed by swept-source optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Feng Yan; Chen Wang; Jayla A Wilson; Michael O'Connell; Sam Ton; Noah Davidson; Mourren Sibichan; Kari Chambers; Ahmed Ahmed; Jody Summers; Qinggong Tang
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2021-10-13       Impact factor: 3.732

Review 5.  Myopia: Mechanisms and Strategies to Slow Down Its Progression.

Authors:  Andrea Russo; Alessandro Boldini; Davide Romano; Giuseppina Mazza; Stefano Bignotti; Francesco Morescalchi; Francesco Semeraro
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 1.974

6.  Effect of Combining 0.01% Atropine with Soft Multifocal Contact Lenses on Myopia Progression in Children.

Authors:  Jenny Huang Jones; Donald O Mutti; Lisa A Jones-Jordan; Jeffrey J Walline
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 2.106

7.  Effects of local myopic defocus on refractive development in monkeys.

Authors:  Earl L Smith; Li-Fang Hung; Juan Huang; Baskar Arumugam
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  Does peripheral retinal input explain the promising myopia control effects of corneal reshaping therapy (CRT or ortho-K) & multifocal soft contact lenses?

Authors:  Earl L Smith; Melanie C W Campbell; Elizabeth Irving
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of myopia in rhesus monkeys.

Authors:  Yong Wang; Hui Ding; William K Stell; Liangping Liu; Saiqun Li; Hongshan Liu; Xingwu Zhong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Myopia Control with a Novel Peripheral Gradient Soft Lens and Orthokeratology: A 2-Year Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Jaime Pauné; Hari Morales; Jesús Armengol; Lluisa Quevedo; Miguel Faria-Ribeiro; José M González-Méijome
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.