A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods

G. Nemeth, A. Tsorbatzoglou, P. Vamosi, Z. Sohajda, A. Berta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the accommodative amplitudes with three different methods in pseudophakic eyes with different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: 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® Acrysofreg; 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. Results: We measured -0.83 ± 0.63D 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. Conclusion: 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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)65-69
Number of pages5
JournalEye
Volume22
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2008

Fingerprint

Intraocular Lenses
Muscle Relaxation
Lenses
Optical Devices
Phacoemulsification
Anterior Chamber
Ultrasonics
Germany
Pharmacology
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods. / Nemeth, G.; Tsorbatzoglou, A.; Vamosi, P.; Sohajda, Z.; Berta, A.

In: Eye, Vol. 22, No. 1, 01.2008, p. 65-69.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nemeth, G. ; Tsorbatzoglou, A. ; Vamosi, P. ; Sohajda, Z. ; Berta, A. / A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods. In: Eye. 2008 ; Vol. 22, No. 1. pp. 65-69.
@article{9b7b7531a9a146ebad79f69b9055fb10,
title = "A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the accommodative amplitudes with three different methods in pseudophakic eyes with different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: 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{\circledR} Acrysof{\circledR} MA60AC and N = 21, one-piece Alcon{\circledR} Acrysofreg; 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{\circledR}, 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{\circledR}, Alcon Laboratories, Forth Worth, TX, USA) before and after pharmacological relaxation of ciliary muscle. Results: We measured -0.83 ± 0.63D 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. Conclusion: 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.",
author = "G. Nemeth and A. Tsorbatzoglou and P. Vamosi and Z. Sohajda and A. Berta",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1038/sj.eye.6702519",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "65--69",
journal = "Eye",
issn = "0950-222X",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods

AU - Nemeth, G.

AU - Tsorbatzoglou, A.

AU - Vamosi, P.

AU - Sohajda, Z.

AU - Berta, A.

PY - 2008/1

Y1 - 2008/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare the accommodative amplitudes with three different methods in pseudophakic eyes with different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: 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® Acrysofreg; 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. Results: We measured -0.83 ± 0.63D 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. Conclusion: 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.

AB - Purpose: To compare the accommodative amplitudes with three different methods in pseudophakic eyes with different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: 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® Acrysofreg; 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. Results: We measured -0.83 ± 0.63D 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. Conclusion: 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38349135492&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38349135492&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/sj.eye.6702519

DO - 10.1038/sj.eye.6702519

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 65

EP - 69

JO - Eye

JF - Eye

SN - 0950-222X

IS - 1

ER -