Nemeth G, Tsorbatzoglou A, Vamosi P, Sohajda Z, Berta A
1Department of Ophthalmology, Medical Health and Science Center, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary.
Eye (Lond). 2008 Jan;22(1):65-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702519. Epub 2006 Jul 14.
To compare the accommodative amplitudes with three different methods in pseudophakic eyes with different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs).
Fifty-one pseudophakic eyes of 44 patients (age: 72.02+/-8.53 years) were studied. One of two different types of IOL were implanted (N=30, three-piece Alcon Acrysof MA60AC and N=21, one-piece Alcon Acrysof SA60AT) in-the-bag after standard phacoemulsification. The time of the examinations was 13.85+/-7.35 months postoperatively. We measured the amplitude of accommodation with three different methods: (1) subjective minus-lenses-to-blur method; (2) a new optical device (ACMaster, Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany) using partial coherence interference (PCI) technique under physiological stimulus; and (3) objective anterior chamber depth measuring with a standard A-scan ultrasonic device (Ultrascan Imaging System, Alcon Laboratories, Forth Worth, TX, USA) before and after pharmacological relaxation of ciliary muscle.
We measured -0.83+/-0.63 D amplitude of accommodation with subjective minus-lenses-to-blur method. The IOL position did not change significantly during physiological accommodation effort measured with PCI method (-0.026+/-0.134 mm). The change in the IOLs position between near fixating and after ciliary muscle relaxation was -0.18+/-0.28 mm measured with ultrasound. There were no significant differences between values of one-piece and three-piece IOL groups.
The amplitude of accommodation measured by subjective and objective methods are different and are not comparable with each other. We did not observe any difference between values of examined two types of IOLs.
比较使用三种不同方法测量不同类型人工晶状体(IOL)的假晶状体眼的调节幅度。
对44例患者(年龄:72.02±8.53岁)的51只假晶状体眼进行研究。在标准超声乳化术后,将两种不同类型的IOL之一植入囊袋内(n = 30,三件式爱尔康Acrysof MA60AC;n = 21,一体式爱尔康Acrysof SA60AT)。检查时间为术后13.85±7.35个月。我们使用三种不同方法测量调节幅度:(1)主观负透镜模糊法;(2)一种新的光学设备(ACMaster,德国耶拿卡尔蔡司公司),在生理刺激下使用部分相干干涉(PCI)技术;(3)在睫状肌药物松弛前后,使用标准A超超声设备(美国德克萨斯州沃思堡爱尔康实验室的Ultrascan成像系统)客观测量前房深度。
使用主观负透镜模糊法测量的调节幅度为-0.83±0.63D。在用PCI方法测量的生理调节过程中,IOL位置没有明显变化(-0.026±0.134mm)。用超声测量,近注视时与睫状肌松弛后IOL位置的变化为-0.18±0.28mm。一体式和三件式IOL组的值之间没有显著差异。
主观和客观方法测量的调节幅度不同,且彼此不可比。我们未观察到所检查的两种类型IOL的值之间存在任何差异。