Jason Charng1, Rose Tan2,3, Chi D Luu2,3, Sam Sadigh1, Dwight Stambolian1, Robyn H Guymer2,3, Samuel G Jacobson1, Artur V Cideciyan1. 1. Scheie Eye Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. 2. Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Department of Surgery (Ophthalmology), The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate whether a practical method of imaging lenticular autofluorescence (AF) can provide an individualized measure correlated with age-related lens yellowing in older subjects undergoing tests involving shorter wavelength lights. Methods: Lenticular AF was imaged with 488-nm excitation using a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (cSLO) routinely used for retinal AF imaging. There were 75 older subjects (ages 47-87) at two sites; a small cohort of younger subjects served as controls. At one site, the cSLO was equipped with an internal reference to allow quantitative AF measurements; at the other site, reduced-illuminance AF imaging (RAFI) was used. In a subset of subjects, lens density index was independently estimated from dark-adapted spectral sensitivities performed psychophysically. Results: Lenticular AF intensity was significantly higher in the older eyes than the younger cohort when measured with the internal reference (59.2 ± 15.4 vs. 134.4 ± 31.7 gray levels; P < 0.05) as well as when recorded with RAFI without the internal reference (10.9 ± 1.5 vs. 26.1 ± 5.7 gray levels; P < 0.05). Lenticular AF was positively correlated with age; however, there could also be large differences between individuals of similar age. Lenticular AF intensity correlated well with lens density indices estimated from psychophysical measures. Conclusions: Lenticular AF measured with a retinal cSLO can provide a practical and individualized measure of lens yellowing, and may be a good candidate to distinguish between preretinal and retinal deficits involving short-wavelength lights in older eyes.
Purpose: To evaluate whether a practical method of imaging lenticular autofluorescence (AF) can provide an individualized measure correlated with age-related lens yellowing in older subjects undergoing tests involving shorter wavelength lights. Methods:Lenticular AF was imaged with 488-nm excitation using a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (cSLO) routinely used for retinal AF imaging. There were 75 older subjects (ages 47-87) at two sites; a small cohort of younger subjects served as controls. At one site, the cSLO was equipped with an internal reference to allow quantitative AF measurements; at the other site, reduced-illuminance AF imaging (RAFI) was used. In a subset of subjects, lens density index was independently estimated from dark-adapted spectral sensitivities performed psychophysically. Results:Lenticular AF intensity was significantly higher in the older eyes than the younger cohort when measured with the internal reference (59.2 ± 15.4 vs. 134.4 ± 31.7 gray levels; P < 0.05) as well as when recorded with RAFI without the internal reference (10.9 ± 1.5 vs. 26.1 ± 5.7 gray levels; P < 0.05). Lenticular AF was positively correlated with age; however, there could also be large differences between individuals of similar age. Lenticular AF intensity correlated well with lens density indices estimated from psychophysical measures. Conclusions: Lenticular AF measured with a retinal cSLO can provide a practical and individualized measure of lens yellowing, and may be a good candidate to distinguish between preretinal and retinal deficits involving short-wavelength lights in older eyes.
Authors: François Delori; Jonathan P Greenberg; Russell L Woods; Jörg Fischer; Tobias Duncker; Janet Sparrow; R Theodore Smith Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Anna Gakamsky; Rory R Duncan; Nicola M Howarth; Baljean Dhillon; Kim K Buttenschön; Daniel J Daly; Dmitry Gakamsky Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Maximilian Pfau; Moritz Lindner; Martin Gliem; Julia S Steinberg; Sarah Thiele; Robert P Finger; Monika Fleckenstein; Frank G Holz; Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Andreas Berlin; Mark E Clark; Thomas A Swain; Nathan A Fischer; Gerald McGwin; Kenneth R Sloan; Cynthia Owsley; Christine A Curcio Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-10-03 Impact factor: 3.048
Authors: Jakob Bjerager; Sami Dabbah; Mohamed Belmouhand; Line Kessel; Jesper Leth Hougaard; Simon P Rothenbuehler; Birgit Sander; Michael Larsen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Tu M Tran; Soohyun Kim; Kira H Lin; Sook Hyun Chung; Sangwan Park; Yevgeniy Sazhnyev; Yinwen Wang; David Cunefare; Sina Farsiu; Sara M Thomasy; Ala Moshiri; Glenn Yiu Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799