Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024
Ciliary muscle and anterior segment characteristics in pre-presbyopic adults with Down syndrome.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vinuela-Navarro Valldeflors, Baker Fiona Jane, Woodhouse J Margaret, Sheppard Amy L
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Previous research has shown that accommodation deficits are common in individuals with Down syndrome (DS), but the origin and mechanisms behind these deficits are still unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of different ocular structures involved in accommodation, in particular the ciliary muscle (CM), in a population of individuals with DS to further understand this deficit and its mechanisms.
METHODS: Thirty-two volunteer participants of pre-presbyopic age with (n = 16) and without DS (n = 16) were recruited. Temporal and nasal images of the CM were acquired using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) while participants fixated an eccentrically located target. Analysis of CM parameters was undertaken using validated semi-automated software. Axial length, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness and corneal curvature were obtained with the Topcon Aladdin Optical Biometer and Corneal Topographer. Non-cycloplegic refractive error and accommodative ability were obtained with an open-field autorefractor and dynamic retinoscopy, respectively. Independent t-tests were conducted to determine differences in CM and other anterior segment parameters between participants with and without DS.
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the CM parameters studied between participants with and without DS (p > 0.05). In contrast, significant differences were found in visual acuity (p < 0.001), accommodative response (p < 0.001) and corneal curvature (K1 p = 0.003 and K2 p < 0.001) between participants with and without DS.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite having poorer accommodation, pre-presbyopic adults with DS do not have a different CM morphology to that found in typically developing adults. These findings suggest that the accommodative deficit found in this population is not due to a mechanical deficit of the CM.
METHODS: Thirty-two volunteer participants of pre-presbyopic age with (n = 16) and without DS (n = 16) were recruited. Temporal and nasal images of the CM were acquired using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) while participants fixated an eccentrically located target. Analysis of CM parameters was undertaken using validated semi-automated software. Axial length, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness and corneal curvature were obtained with the Topcon Aladdin Optical Biometer and Corneal Topographer. Non-cycloplegic refractive error and accommodative ability were obtained with an open-field autorefractor and dynamic retinoscopy, respectively. Independent t-tests were conducted to determine differences in CM and other anterior segment parameters between participants with and without DS.
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the CM parameters studied between participants with and without DS (p > 0.05). In contrast, significant differences were found in visual acuity (p < 0.001), accommodative response (p < 0.001) and corneal curvature (K1 p = 0.003 and K2 p < 0.001) between participants with and without DS.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite having poorer accommodation, pre-presbyopic adults with DS do not have a different CM morphology to that found in typically developing adults. These findings suggest that the accommodative deficit found in this population is not due to a mechanical deficit of the CM.