The effect of human in vivo accommodation on crystalline lens stability

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 91, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 790-793

  Schachar, Ronald A ^a   Davila, Carlos ^b   Pierscionek, Barbara K ^c   Chen, Wickham ^b   Ward, Warren W ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

^b Southern Methodist University   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

^d Fourward Technologies   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCOMMODATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE EXAMINATION; FEMALE; HEAD MOVEMENT; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; LENS; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SACCADIC EYE MOVEMENT;

ACCOMMODATION, OCULAR; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HEAD MOVEMENTS; HUMANS; LENS, CRYSTALLINE; MALE; MOVEMENT; SACCADES; VISION, MONOCULAR;

EID: 34249775502     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.110791     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Sokolowska A, Thorn F. Accommodation induced changes in crystalline lens position. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44: E-Abstract, 4072.
2. Kirschkamp T, Dunne M, Barry JC. Phakometric measurement of ocular surface radii of curvature, axial separations and alignment in relaxed and accommodated human eyes. Ophthalmic Physiol Optics 2004;24:65-73.
3. Deubel H, Bridgeman B. Fourth Purkinje image signals reveal eye-lens deviations and retinal image distortions during saccades. Vision Res 1995;35:529-38.
4. Bailey MD, Sinnott L, Mutti DO. Oscillations of the crystalline lens following saccadic eye movements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47: E-Abstract, 5854.
5. Crane HD, Steele CM. Generation-V dual-Purkinje-image eyetracker. Appl Opt 1985;24:527-37.
6. Kording KP, Kayser C, Betsch BY, et al. Non-contact eye-tracking on cats. J Neurosci Methods 2001;110:103-11.
7. Crane HD. The Purkinje image eyetracker, image stabilization, and related forms of stimulus manipulation. In: Kelly DH, eds. Visual science and engineering models and applications. New York: Marcel-Dekker, 1994:15-89.
8. von Helmholtz H. Uber die akkommodation des auges. Arch Ophthalmol 1855;1:1-74.
9. Schor CM, Lott LA, Pope D, et al. Saccades reduce latency and increase velocity of ocular accommodation. Vision Res 1999;32:3769-95.
10. Schor CM. Neural control of eye movements. In: Kaufman PI, Alm A, eds. Adler's physiology of the eye 10th edn, St Louis: C. V. Mosby Co. 2002:830-858.
11. Brown N. The shape of the lens equator. Exp Eye Res 1974;19:571-6.
12. Ludwig K, Wegscheider E, Hoops JP, et al. In vivo imaging of the human zonular apparatus with high-resolution ultrasound biomicroscopy. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1999;237:361-71.
13. Farnsworth PN, Burke P. Three-dimensional architecture of the suspensory apparatus of the lens of the Rhesus monkey. Exp Eye Res 1977;25:563-76.
14. Schachar RA. The mechanism of accommodation and presbyopia. Int Ophthalmol Clin 2006;46:39-61.
15. Glenn J. Interviews with an astronaut. 2002. http://www.stmms.org/ interview.html and http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ glenn_at_40_020225. html (accessed 6 Mar 2007).
16. Vanderploeg JM. Near visual acuity measurements of space shuttle crewmembers. Aviat Space Environ Med 1985;57:492.
17. Schachar RA, Cudmore DP. The effect of gravity on the amplitude of accommodation. Ann Ophthalmol 1994;26:65-70.
18. Ninomiya S, Fujikado T, Kuroda T, et al. Changes of ocular aberration with accommodation. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;134:924-6.
19. Hazel CA, Cox MJ, Strang NC. Wavefront aberration and its relationship to the accommodative stimulus-response function in myopic subjects. Optom Vis Sci 2003;80:151-8.
20. Plainis S, Ginis HS, Pallikaris A. The effect of ocular aberrations on steady-state errors of accommodative response. J Vis 2005;5:466-77.
21. Tscherning M. Physiological optics, 2nd edn. Philadelphia, PA: Keyston Publishing, 1904:160-89.
22. Fincham EF. Mechanism of accommodation. Br J Ophthalmol 1997;8(Suppl):2-80.
23. Dubbelman M, Van der Heijde GL, Weeber HA. Change in shape of the aging human crystalline lens with accommodation. Vision Res 2005;45:117-32.
24. Li Y, Chalta MR, Huang D. Measurement of lens curvature change during accommodation with high-speed optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46: E-Abstract, 2554.
25. Bolz M, Prinz A, Drexler W, et al. Linear relationship of refractive and biometric lenticular changes during accommodation in emmetropic and myopic eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 2007;91:360-5.
26. Lee KE, Klein BE, Klein R, et al. Changes in refraction over 10 years in an adult population: the Beaver Dam Eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:2566-71.
27. Kaufman PL, Rohen JW, Barany EH. Hyperopia and loss of accommodation following ciliary muscle disinsertion in the cynomolgus monkey: physiologic and scanning electron microscopic studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1979;18:665-73.
28. Schachar RA, Pierscionek BK, Abolmaali A, et al. The relationship between accommodative amplitude and the ratio of central lens thickness to its equatorial diameter in vertebrate eyes. Br J Ophthalmol. Published Online First 31 October 2006. doi: 10, 1136/bjo.2006.107524.
29. Schachar RA, Fygenson DK. Topographical changes of biconvex objects during equatorial traction: an analogy for accommodation of the human lens. Br J Ophthalmol. Published Online First 19 July 2006. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2006.094888.
30. Chien CH, Huang T, Schachar RA. Analysis of human crystalline lens accommodation. J Biomech 2006;39:672-80.
31. Abolmaali A, Schachar RA, Le T. Sensitivity study of human crystalline lens accommodation. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2006;85:77-90.
32. Schachar RA, Abolmaali A, Le T. Insights into the age-related decline in the amplitude of accommodation of the human lens using a non-linear finite-element model. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:1304-9.