Derek Nankivil1, Bianca Maceo Heilman2, Heather Durkee2, Fabrice Manns2, Klaus Ehrmann3, Shawn Kelly1, Esdras Arrieta-Quintero1, Jean-Marie Parel1. 1. Ophthalmic Biophysics Center, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, United States. 2. Ophthalmic Biophysics Center, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, United States Biomedical Optics and Laser Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, United States. 3. Vision Cooperative Research Centre, Brien Holden Vision Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the role of anterior and posterior zonular tension on the optomechanical lens response during accommodation simulation. METHODS: Ten eyes from nine hamadryas baboons (4.9 ± 0.7 years) and 20 eyes from 18 cynomolgus monkeys (5.4 ± 0.3 years) were dissected, leaving the lens, zonules, ciliary body, hyaloid membrane, anterior vitreous, and a segmented scleral rim intact. The lens preparation was mounted in a lens stretcher, and the outer scleral shell was displaced radially in a stepwise fashion. The load, lens, and ciliary body diameters, lens power, lens thickness, and the anterior and posterior radius of curvature were measured during stretching. The zonular fibers attached to either the posterior or anterior lens surface were then carefully transected and the experiment was repeated. Zonular transection was confirmed in four eyes via laser scanning confocal microscopy after immunostaining. The effect of zonular transection on the tissue response to stretching was quantified. RESULTS: Without anterior zonules, 48% and 97% of the changes in anterior and posterior radii are retained. Without posterior zonules, 81% and 67% of the changes in anterior and posterior radii are retained. The changes in lens shape were reduced after transecting either the anterior or posterior zonules; however, both surfaces still changed shape. CONCLUSIONS: While either the anterior or posterior zonules alone are capable of changing the shape of both lens surfaces, the anterior zonules have a greater effect on the anterior lens surface, and the posterior zonules have a greater effect on the posterior lens surface. Copyright 2015 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: To determine the role of anterior and posterior zonular tension on the optomechanical lens response during accommodation simulation. METHODS: Ten eyes from nine hamadryas baboons (4.9 ± 0.7 years) and 20 eyes from 18 cynomolgus monkeys (5.4 ± 0.3 years) were dissected, leaving the lens, zonules, ciliary body, hyaloid membrane, anterior vitreous, and a segmented scleral rim intact. The lens preparation was mounted in a lens stretcher, and the outer scleral shell was displaced radially in a stepwise fashion. The load, lens, and ciliary body diameters, lens power, lens thickness, and the anterior and posterior radius of curvature were measured during stretching. The zonular fibers attached to either the posterior or anterior lens surface were then carefully transected and the experiment was repeated. Zonular transection was confirmed in four eyes via laser scanning confocal microscopy after immunostaining. The effect of zonular transection on the tissue response to stretching was quantified. RESULTS: Without anterior zonules, 48% and 97% of the changes in anterior and posterior radii are retained. Without posterior zonules, 81% and 67% of the changes in anterior and posterior radii are retained. The changes in lens shape were reduced after transecting either the anterior or posterior zonules; however, both surfaces still changed shape. CONCLUSIONS: While either the anterior or posterior zonules alone are capable of changing the shape of both lens surfaces, the anterior zonules have a greater effect on the anterior lens surface, and the posterior zonules have a greater effect on the posterior lens surface. Copyright 2015 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: Bianca M Maceo; Fabrice Manns; David Borja; Derek Nankivil; Stephen Uhlhorn; Esdras Arrieta; Arthur Ho; Robert C Augusteyn; Jean-Marie Parel Journal: J Vis Date: 2011-11-30 Impact factor: 2.240
Authors: Elke Lütjen-Drecoll; Paul L Kaufman; Rainer Wasielewski; Lin Ting-Li; Mary Ann Croft Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2009-10-08 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: David Borja; Fabrice Manns; Arthur Ho; Noel M Ziebarth; Ana Carolina Acosta; Esdras Arrieta-Quintera; Robert C Augusteyn; Jean-Marie Parel Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2010-01-27 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: David Borja; Damian Siedlecki; Alberto de Castro; Stephen Uhlhorn; Sergio Ortiz; Esdras Arrieta; Jean-Marie Parel; Susana Marcos; Fabrice Manns Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2010-11-08 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Bianca Maceo Heilman; Fabrice Manns; Marco Ruggeri; Arthur Ho; Alex Gonzalez; Cor Rowaan; Andres Bernal; Esdras Arrieta; Jean-Marie Parel Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Jacob Lifton; Bruce Burkemper; Xuejuan Jiang; Anmol A Pardeshi; Grace Richter; Roberta McKean-Cowdin; Rohit Varma; Benjamin Y Xu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-11-02 Impact factor: 5.488