Byunghoon Chung1, Seonghee Choi1, Yong Woo Ji1,2, Eung Kweon Kim1,3, Kyoung Yul Seo1, Tae-Im Kim4. 1. The Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, 10444, Republic of Korea. 3. Corneal Dystrophy Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea. 4. The Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea. tikim@yuhs.ac.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare objective accommodation of phakic and pseudophakic eyes between two different age groups. METHODS: Eighty-three eyes (83 participants aged ≥ 40 years) with a visual acuity of 20/25 or better, and refractive error < spherical - 1.0 diopters (D) and cylindrical 1.0 D, were included. Forty-four patients had undergone phacoemulsification and monofocal intraocular lens implantation and were examined 6 months post-surgery. Participants were divided into groups 1 (pseudophakic, age < 60 years), 2 (pseudophakic, ≥ 60 years), 3 (phakic, < 60 years), and 4 (phakic, ≥ 60 years). Objective accommodation and pupil diameter to 2.0- and 3.0-D stimuli were measured with a binocular open-field autorefractor. RESULTS: The mean objective accommodation was 0.29 ± 0.47 D, 0.01 ± 0.21 D, 1.00 ± 0.88 D, and 0.01 ± 0.13 to a 2.0-D stimulus, and 0.26 ± 0.51 D, - 0.06 ± 0.21 D, 1.42 ± 1.21 D, and - 0.06 ± 0.21 to a 3.0-D stimulus in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. For both stimuli, the values in group 1 exceeded those in groups 2 and 4, and were smaller than those in group 3, while the values in group 3 exceeded those in groups 2 and 4. The mean pupillary diameter was - 0.5 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.3 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.6 ± 0.5 mm, and - 0.6 ± 0.9 mm to a 2.0-D stimulus, and - 0.6 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.6 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.9 ± 0.5 mm, and - 1.0 ± 1.1 mm to a 3.0-D stimulus in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. There was significant correlation between objective accommodation and changes of pupil size for both stimuli. CONCLUSION: Age seems to play a role in objective accommodation among relatively young pseudophakic patients.
PURPOSE: To compare objective accommodation of phakic and pseudophakic eyes between two different age groups. METHODS: Eighty-three eyes (83 participants aged ≥ 40 years) with a visual acuity of 20/25 or better, and refractive error < spherical - 1.0 diopters (D) and cylindrical 1.0 D, were included. Forty-four patients had undergone phacoemulsification and monofocal intraocular lens implantation and were examined 6 months post-surgery. Participants were divided into groups 1 (pseudophakic, age < 60 years), 2 (pseudophakic, ≥ 60 years), 3 (phakic, < 60 years), and 4 (phakic, ≥ 60 years). Objective accommodation and pupil diameter to 2.0- and 3.0-D stimuli were measured with a binocular open-field autorefractor. RESULTS: The mean objective accommodation was 0.29 ± 0.47 D, 0.01 ± 0.21 D, 1.00 ± 0.88 D, and 0.01 ± 0.13 to a 2.0-D stimulus, and 0.26 ± 0.51 D, - 0.06 ± 0.21 D, 1.42 ± 1.21 D, and - 0.06 ± 0.21 to a 3.0-D stimulus in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. For both stimuli, the values in group 1 exceeded those in groups 2 and 4, and were smaller than those in group 3, while the values in group 3 exceeded those in groups 2 and 4. The mean pupillary diameter was - 0.5 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.3 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.6 ± 0.5 mm, and - 0.6 ± 0.9 mm to a 2.0-D stimulus, and - 0.6 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.6 ± 0.8 mm, - 0.9 ± 0.5 mm, and - 1.0 ± 1.1 mm to a 3.0-D stimulus in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. There was significant correlation between objective accommodation and changes of pupil size for both stimuli. CONCLUSION: Age seems to play a role in objective accommodation among relatively young pseudophakic patients.