Lisa A Ostrin1, Mariana B Garcia2, Vivian Choh3, Christine F Wildsoet2. 1. University of Houston College of Optometry, Houston, Texas, United States. 2. University of California Berkeley School of Optometry, Berkeley, California, United States. 3. University of Waterloo Optometry and Vision Science, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The guinea pig is being used increasingly as a model of human myopia. As accommodation may influence the effects of manipulations used in experimental myopia models, understanding the accommodative ability of guinea pigs is important. Here, nonselective muscarinic agonists were used as pharmacological tools to study guinea pig accommodation. METHODS: Measurements were made on 15 pigmented guinea pigs. For in vivo testing, animals were anesthetized and, following baseline measurements, 2% pilocarpine was applied topically. Measurements included A-scan ultrasonography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, corneal topography, and refraction. In vitro lens scanning experiments were performed using anterior segment preparations, with measurements before and during exposure to carbachol. Anterior segment structures were examined histologically and immunohistochemistry was done to characterize the muscarinic receptor subtypes present. RESULTS: In vivo, pilocarpine induced a myopic shift in refractive error coupled to a small, but consistent decrease in anterior chamber depth (ACD), a smaller and more variable increase in lens thickness, and a decrease in pupil size. Lens thickness increases were short-lived (10 minutes), while ACD and pupil size decreased over 20 minutes. Corneal curvature was not significantly affected. Carbachol tested on anterior segment preparations in vitro was without effect on lens back vertex distance, but did stimulate pupil constriction. Immunohistochemistry indicated the presence of muscarinic receptor subtypes 1 to 5 in the iris and ciliary body. CONCLUSIONS: The observed pilocarpine-induced changes in ACD, lens thickness, and refraction are consistent with active accommodation in the guinea pig, through cholinergic muscarinic stimulation. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: The guinea pig is being used increasingly as a model of humanmyopia. As accommodation may influence the effects of manipulations used in experimental myopia models, understanding the accommodative ability of guinea pigs is important. Here, nonselective muscarinic agonists were used as pharmacological tools to study guinea pig accommodation. METHODS: Measurements were made on 15 pigmented guinea pigs. For in vivo testing, animals were anesthetized and, following baseline measurements, 2% pilocarpine was applied topically. Measurements included A-scan ultrasonography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, corneal topography, and refraction. In vitro lens scanning experiments were performed using anterior segment preparations, with measurements before and during exposure to carbachol. Anterior segment structures were examined histologically and immunohistochemistry was done to characterize the muscarinic receptor subtypes present. RESULTS: In vivo, pilocarpine induced a myopic shift in refractive error coupled to a small, but consistent decrease in anterior chamber depth (ACD), a smaller and more variable increase in lens thickness, and a decrease in pupil size. Lens thickness increases were short-lived (10 minutes), while ACD and pupil size decreased over 20 minutes. Corneal curvature was not significantly affected. Carbachol tested on anterior segment preparations in vitro was without effect on lens back vertex distance, but did stimulate pupil constriction. Immunohistochemistry indicated the presence of muscarinic receptor subtypes 1 to 5 in the iris and ciliary body. CONCLUSIONS: The observed pilocarpine-induced changes in ACD, lens thickness, and refraction are consistent with active accommodation in the guinea pig, through cholinergic muscarinic stimulation. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: Christianne E Strang; Jordan M Renna; Franklin R Amthor; Kent T Keyser Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2009-12-30 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Kathryn Richdale; Melissa D Bailey; Loraine T Sinnott; Chiu-Yen Kao; Karla Zadnik; Mark A Bullimore Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: David Troilo; Earl L Smith; Debora L Nickla; Regan Ashby; Andrei V Tkatchenko; Lisa A Ostrin; Timothy J Gawne; Machelle T Pardue; Jody A Summers; Chea-Su Kee; Falk Schroedl; Siegfried Wahl; Lyndon Jones Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Andrew D Pucker; Ashley R Jackson; Hugh J Morris; Andrew J Fischer; Kirk M McHugh; Donald O Mutti Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Li Dong; Xu Han Shi; Yi Kun Kang; Wen Bin Wei; Ya Xing Wang; Xiao Lin Xu; Fei Gao; Jost B Jonas Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-04-29 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Sarah Elizabeth Singh; Christine Frances Wildsoet; Austin John Roorda Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 4.799