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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Schachar RA (2006) The mechanism of accommodation and presbyopia. Int Ophthalmol Clin 46:39–61
Koretz JF, Cook CA, Kaufman PL (1997) Accommodation and presbyopia in the human eye. Changes in the anterior segment and crystalline lens with focus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 38:569–578
Hayashi K, Hayashi H (2006) Comparison of amplitude of apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes with that of normal accommodation in phakic eyes in various age groups. Eye (Lond) 20:290–296
Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F (2003) Aging changes in apparent accommodation in eyes with a monofocal intraocular lens. Am J Ophthalmol 135:432–436
Win-Hall DM, Glasser A (2009) Objective accommodation measurements in pseudophakic subjects using an autorefractor and an aberrometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:282–290
Win-Hall DM, Ostrin LA, Kasthurirangan S, Glasser A (2007) Objective accommodation measurement with the grand Seiko and Hartinger coincidence refractometer. Optom Vis Sci 84:879–887
Wold JE, Hu A, Chen S, Glasser A (2003) Subjective and objective measurement of human accommodative amplitude. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:1878–1888
Sawusch MR, Guyton DL (1991) Optimal astigmatism to enhance depth of focus after cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 98:1025–1029
Fukuyama M, Oshika T, Amano S, Yoshitomi F (1999) Relationship between apparent accommodation and corneal multifocality in pseudophakic eyes. Ophthalmology 106:1178–1181
Nemeth G, Lipecz A, Szalai E, Berta A, Modis L Jr (2013) Accommodation in phakic and pseudophakic eyes measured with subjective and objective methods. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1534–1542
Nakazawa M, Ohtsuki K (1983) Apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes after implantation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol 96:435–438
Nakazawa M, Ohtsuki K (1984) Apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes after implantation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses: optical analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 25:1458–1460
Ravalico G, Baccara F (1990) Apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes. Acta Ophthalmol 68:604–606
Lara F, Bernal-Molina P, Fernandez-Sanchez V, Lopez-Gil N (2014) Changes in the objective amplitude of accommodation with pupil size. Optom Vis Sci 91:1215–1220
Lopez-Gil N, Fernandez-Sanchez V (2010) The change of spherical aberration during accommodation and its effect on the accommodation response. J Vis 10:12
Hayashi K, Yoshida M, Manabe S, Hayashi H (2010) Comparison of visual function between phakic eyes and pseudophakic eyes with a monofocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:20–27
Tsorbatzoglou A, Nemeth G, Math J, Berta A (2006) Pseudophakic accommodation and pseudoaccommodation under physiological conditions measured with partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 32:1345–1350
Atchison DA, Capper EJ, McCabe KL (1994) Critical subjective measurement of amplitude of accommodation. Optom Vis Sci 71:699–706
Langenbucher A, Huber S, Nguyen NX, Seitz B, Gusek-Schneider GC, Kuchle M (2003) Measurement of accommodation after implantation of an accommodating posterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:677–685
Lopez-Gil N, Fernandez-Sanchez V, Legras R, Montes-Mico R, Lara F, Nguyen-Khoa JL (2008) Accommodation-related changes in monochromatic aberrations of the human eye as a function of age. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49:1736–1743
Pugh JR, Winn B (1988) Modification of the canon auto ref R1 for use as a continuously recording infra-red optometer. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 8:460–464
Tsuneyoshi Y, Negishi K, Tsubota K (2017) Importance of accommodation and eye dominance for measuring objective refractions. Am J Ophthalmol 177:69–76
Sheppard AL, Davies LN (2010) Clinical evaluation of the grand Seiko auto ref/keratometer WAM-5500. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 30:143–151
Win-Hall DM, Houser J, Glasser A (2010) Static and dynamic accommodation measured using the WAM-5500 autorefractor. Optom Vis Sci 87:873–882
Findl O (2005) Intraocular lenses for restoring accommodation: hope and reality. J Refract Surg 21:321–323
Kriechbaum K, Findl O, Koeppl C, Menapace R, Drexler W (2005) Stimulus-driven versus pilocarpine-induced biometric changes in pseudophakic eyes. Ophthalmology 112:453–459
Wang B, Ciuffreda KJ (2006) Depth-of-focus of the human eye: theory and clinical implications. Surv Ophthalmol 51:75–85
Funding
This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number, HI18C1111).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This study was presented as e-poster in 36th Congress of the ESCRS on 22nd to 26th September 2018.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chung, B., Choi, S., Ji, Y.W. et al. Comparison of objective accommodation in phakic and pseudophakic eyes between age groups. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 257, 575–582 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-019-04249-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-019-04249-7