School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.
Clin Exp Optom. 2022 Aug;105(6):624-630. doi: 10.1080/08164622.2021.1951600. Epub 2021 Jul 28.
The discovery of an accommodative response to ocular surface stimulation could inform clinicians and patients that optical effects may occur due to ocular discomfort and perhaps an assessment of the accommodative system after carrying out interventions impacting the ocular surface, may be warranted.
There have been no previous reports evaluating the effect of noxious stimulation on accommodation. Here, the accommodative response of healthy participants after the application of noxious corneal stimulation is characterised.
A computerised Belmonte pneumatic esthesiometer was used to determine detection thresholds (using ascending method of limits), and to randomly deliver mechanical and chemical stimuli from levels of detection threshold to twice the threshold in 50% steps, to the central cornea of 15 healthy subjects. For each suprathreshold stimulus, accommodative and pupil responses were measured with a validated eccentric infrared photorefractor. Quantitative differences in accommodative/pupil response, stimulus modality/intensity and left/right eye were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA. Tukey HSD tests were used for all post hoc analyses.
Accommodation increased from baseline as the corneal apical stimulus intensity increased. This happened regardless of whether mechanical or chemical stimulation occurred (ANOVA, < 0.05). At 200% threshold, accommodative response was greater than all stimulus intensities (Tukey HSD, all 0.05). There was no difference in pupil response between the stimulation intensities (100%, 150% and 200% threshold). There was no difference in accommodative response between the left and right eye for mechanical (ANOVA, 0.05) and chemical stimulation (ANOVA, > 0.05).
Noxious stimulation of the cornea seems to produce a dose-dependent increase in the accommodative response in the eyes but not a dose-dependent pupil response.
发现眼球表面刺激的调节反应可以告知临床医生和患者,由于眼部不适,可能会出现光学效果,并且在对眼部表面进行干预后,可能需要评估调节系统。
以前没有报告评估有害刺激对调节的影响。在这里,我们描述了健康参与者在角膜有害刺激后调节反应的特征。
使用计算机化的 Belmonte 气动触觉计,使用升序极限法确定检测阈值,并以 50%的步长,从检测阈值水平随机向中央角膜施加机械和化学刺激,强度达到阈值的两倍。对于每个超阈值刺激,使用经过验证的偏心红外视网膜反射仪测量调节和瞳孔反应。使用重复测量 ANOVA 分析调节/瞳孔反应、刺激方式/强度以及左眼/右眼的定量差异。所有事后分析均使用 Tukey HSD 检验。
随着角膜顶点刺激强度的增加,调节从基线增加。无论是发生机械刺激还是化学刺激都是如此(ANOVA, < 0.05)。在 200%阈值时,调节反应大于所有刺激强度(Tukey HSD,均为 0.05)。在刺激强度为 100%、150%和 200%时,瞳孔反应没有差异。机械刺激和化学刺激时,左眼和右眼的调节反应没有差异(ANOVA, < 0.05 和 ANOVA, > 0.05)。
角膜的有害刺激似乎会导致眼睛的调节反应呈剂量依赖性增加,但不会导致瞳孔反应呈剂量依赖性增加。