Understanding of the biomechanics of the accommodative apparatus in the eyes with different refraction is important for solving the problems of theoretical and practical ophthalmology. Purpose: To determine the change...Understanding of the biomechanics of the accommodative apparatus in the eyes with different refraction is important for solving the problems of theoretical and practical ophthalmology. Purpose: To determine the changes of anterior eye segment dimensions during accommodation response in normal eyes and in patients with myopia, hypermetropia. Methods and Material: 116 eyes (56 patients aged from 18 to 30 years, refraction from -2.0 to + 2.0 D) were examined. All the patients underwent a full ophthalmological examination. The ocular anterior segment was imaged using a rotational Scheimpflug camera Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) under non- and 3.0 D of accommodative demands. The statistical data were represented as the mean value ± standard deviation (M ± SD). The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to assess the normality distribution. Wilcoxon test was used for comparison. Results: Results showed an increase in the optical density of the crystalline lens, a pupil diameter decrease and changing of the iris profile during accommodation in all patients. An increase in the total corneal aberrations and decrease in the corneal spherical aberration were revealed only in emmetropic eyes. Conclusions: The accommodative response is a multicomponent process. Scheimpflug visualization revealed the differences in the accommodative response in normal and ametropic eyes.展开更多
文摘Understanding of the biomechanics of the accommodative apparatus in the eyes with different refraction is important for solving the problems of theoretical and practical ophthalmology. Purpose: To determine the changes of anterior eye segment dimensions during accommodation response in normal eyes and in patients with myopia, hypermetropia. Methods and Material: 116 eyes (56 patients aged from 18 to 30 years, refraction from -2.0 to + 2.0 D) were examined. All the patients underwent a full ophthalmological examination. The ocular anterior segment was imaged using a rotational Scheimpflug camera Pentacam HR (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) under non- and 3.0 D of accommodative demands. The statistical data were represented as the mean value ± standard deviation (M ± SD). The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to assess the normality distribution. Wilcoxon test was used for comparison. Results: Results showed an increase in the optical density of the crystalline lens, a pupil diameter decrease and changing of the iris profile during accommodation in all patients. An increase in the total corneal aberrations and decrease in the corneal spherical aberration were revealed only in emmetropic eyes. Conclusions: The accommodative response is a multicomponent process. Scheimpflug visualization revealed the differences in the accommodative response in normal and ametropic eyes.
