Literature DB >> 25208857

Visual consequences of refractive errors in the general population.

Virginie J M Verhoeven1, King T Wong2, Gabriëlle H S Buitendijk1, Albert Hofman3, Johannes R Vingerling1, Caroline C W Klaver4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the frequency and causes of visual impairment in relation to refractive error.
DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6597 participants from Rotterdam Study I (baseline and 4 follow-up examinations) and 2579 participants from Rotterdam Study II (baseline and 2 follow-up examinations), all 55 years or older, were included.
METHODS: Participants underwent an extensive ophthalmic examination, including best-corrected visual acuity and objective refraction, fundus photography, visual field perimetry, and optical coherence tomography imaging of macula and optic disc. We calculated cumulative risks and odds ratios of visual impairment for various refractive error categories and determined causes by using all screening information as well as medical records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Unilateral and bilateral low vision (World Health Organization [WHO] criteria, VA < 0.3 and VA ≥ 0.05; United States (US) criteria, VA < 0.5 and VA ≥ 0.1) and blindness (WHO criteria, VA < 0.05; US criteria, VA < 0.1).
RESULTS: Cumulative risks of visual impairment ranged from virtually 0 in all refractive error categories at 55 years of age to 9.5% (standard error, 0.01) for emmetropia and 15.3% (standard error, 0.06) for high hyperopia to 33.7% (standard error, 0.08) for high myopia at 85 years of age. The major causes of visual impairment in highly hyperopic persons were age-related macular degeneration (AMD), cataract, and combined causes (each 25%); in highly myopic persons, the major cause was myopic macular degeneration (38.9%). The major causes of visual impairment for the other refractive error categories were AMD and cataract. Compared with those with emmetropia, those with high myopia had a significantly increased lifetime risk of visual impairment; those with -6 diopters (D) or less and -10 D or more had an odds ratio (OR) risk of 3.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-8.2) of visual impairment; those with less than -10 D had an OR of 22.0 (95% CI, 9.2-52.6).
CONCLUSIONS: Of all refractive errors, high myopia has the most severe visual consequences. Irreversible macular pathologic features are the most common cause of visual impairment in this group.
Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25208857     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.07.030

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


  42 in total

1.  The Rotterdam Study: 2016 objectives and design update.

Authors:  Albert Hofman; Guy G O Brusselle; Sarwa Darwish Murad; Cornelia M van Duijn; Oscar H Franco; André Goedegebure; M Arfan Ikram; Caroline C W Klaver; Tamar E C Nijsten; Robin P Peeters; Bruno H Ch Stricker; Henning W Tiemeier; André G Uitterlinden; Meike W Vernooij
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-09-19       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  The standardized definition of high myopia.

Authors:  Pablo Sanz Diez; Siegfried Wahl; Arne Ohlendorf
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-06-15       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  [Epidemiology of refractive errors].

Authors:  C Wolfram
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  Corneal topographic alterations after selective laser trabeculoplasty.

Authors:  Kursat Atalay; Ahmet Kirgiz; Kubra Serefoglu Cabuk; Havva Erdogan Kaldirim
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 2.031

Review 5.  Concise Review: Using Stem Cells to Prevent the Progression of Myopia-A Concept.

Authors:  Miroslaw Janowski; Jeff W M Bulte; James T Handa; David Rini; Piotr Walczak
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 6.277

Review 6.  Changes in axial length after orthokeratology lens treatment for myopia: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Meng Guan; Weijia Zhao; Yu Geng; Yang Zhang; Jia Ma; Zonghan Chen; Mingqian Peng; Yan Li
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 2.031

7.  Preventing Myopia.

Authors:  Wolf A Lagrèze; Frank Schaeffel
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2017-09-04       Impact factor: 5.594

8.  Incidence of and Factors Associated With Myopia and High Myopia in Chinese Children, Based on Refraction Without Cycloplegia.

Authors:  Sean K Wang; Yangfeng Guo; Chimei Liao; Yanxian Chen; Guangxing Su; Guohui Zhang; Lei Zhang; Mingguang He
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 7.389

Review 9.  Pharmacogenomic Approach to Antimyopia Drug Development: Pathways Lead the Way.

Authors:  Tatiana V Tkatchenko; Andrei V Tkatchenko
Journal:  Trends Pharmacol Sci       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 14.819

10.  Risk Stratification and Clinical Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores in Ophthalmology.

Authors:  Ayub Qassim; Emmanuelle Souzeau; Georgie Hollitt; Mark M Hassall; Owen M Siggs; Jamie E Craig
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.