Uncorrected visual acuity in patients with simple myopic astigmatism based on the power and axis of the astigmatism Artykuł oryginalny

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Hadis Pourchamani
Hassan Hashemi
Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur
Ali Mirzajani
Abbasali Yekta
Alireza Mohamadi
Mehdi Khabazkhoob

Abstrakt

Purpose: The aim of the current study is to assess uncorrected visual acuity in eyes with simple myopic astigmatism.


Methods: patients with simple myopic astigmatism who had no history of surgery or pathology with best-corrected visual acuity of logMAR 0.0 (or 6/6) were included in this study. In the present study, eyes were classified into three groups; with-the-rule (WTR) (180 ±30), against-the-rule (ATR) (90 ±30) and oblique. The comparison of uncorrected visual acuity among these three groups was made based on the power and type of refractive and corneal astigmatism.


Results: Only right eye per participant was chosen, providing a final sample of 1435 eyes. The number (percentage) of eyes with WTR, ATR and oblique astigmatism were 555 (38.7%), 681 (47.5%) and 199 (13.9%) respectively. The mean uncorrected visual acuity was different among three groups (p <0.001). Mean logMAR visual acuity in eyes with 1 D of astigmatism or less were 0.06 (±0.09), 0.07 (±0.09) and 0.06 (±0.08) in WTR, ATR and oblique astigmatism respectively. Mean logMAR visual acuity in eyes with greater than 3 D of astigmatism were 0.51 (±0.12), 0.17 (±0.06) and 0.43 (±0.19) in WTR, ATR and oblique astigmatism respectively which showed a significant difference among them (p <0.001).


Conclusion: The magnitude and axis of astigmatism both were associated with uncorrected visual acuity in eyes with simple myopic astigmatism so that increasing the power of astigmatism reduces vision.

##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##

##plugins.generic.usageStats.noStats##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Dział
Diagnostyka

Bibliografia

1. Wolfram C, Höhn R, Kottler U et al. Prevalence of refractive errors in the European adult population: the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS). Br J Ophthalmol. 2014; 98(7): 857-61.
2. Khoshhal F, Hashemi H, Hooshmand E et al. The prevalence of refractive errors in the Middle East: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Ophthalmol. 2020; 40(6): 1571-86.
3. Tan QQ, Wen BW, Liao X et al. Optical quality in low astigmatic eyes with or without cylindrical correction. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2020; 258(2): 451-8.
4. Remón L, Tornel M, Furlan WD. Visual acuity in simple myopic astigmatism: influence of cylinder axis. Optom Vis Sci. 2006; 83(5): 311-5.
5. Wolffsohn JS, Bhogal G, Shah S. Effect of uncorrected astigmatism on vision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011; 37(3): 454-60.
6. Read SA, Collins MJ, Carney LG. A review of astigmatism and its possible genesis. Clin Exp Optom. 2007; 90(1): 5-19.
7. Dobson V, Miller JM, Harvey EM et al. Amblyopia in astigmatic preschool children. Vision Res. 2003; 43(9): 1081-90.
8. Harvey EM, Dobson V, Miller JM. Prevalence of high astigmatism, eyeglass wear, and poor visual acuity among Native American grade school children. Optom Vis Sci. 2006; 83(4): 206-12.
9. Wang LL, Wang W, Han XT et al. Influence of severity and types of astigmatism on visual acuity in school-aged children in southern China. Int J Ophthalmol. 2018; 11(8): 1377-83.
10. Mimouni M, Nemet A, Pokroy R et al. The effect of astigmatism axis on visual acuity. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2017; 27(3): 308-11.
11. Remón L, Monsoriu JA, Furlan WD. Influence of different types of astigmatism on visual acuity. J Optom. 2017; 10(3): 141-8.
12. Remón L, Benlloch J, Pons A et al. Visual acuity with computer simulated and lens-induced astigmatism. 2014; 44: 521-31.
13. Kobashi H, Kamiya K, Shimizu K et al. Effect of axis orientation on visual performance in astigmatic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012; 38(8): 1352-9.
14. Lai YH, Hsu HT, Wang HZ et al. Astigmatism in preschool children in Taiwan. J Aapos. 2010; 14(2): 150-4.
15. Vincent M, Marin G, Legras R. Effect of Simulated and Real Spherical and Astigmatism Defocus on Visual Acuity and Image Quality Score. Optom Vis Sci. 2020; 97(1): 36-44.
16. Moshirfar M, Villarreal A, Thomson AC et al. PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study. Ophthalmol Ther. 2021; 10(1): 175-85.
17. Hasegawa Y, Honbo M, Miyata K et al. Type of residual astigmatism and uncorrected visual acuity in pseudophakic eyes. Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1): 1225.
18. Hashemi H, Nabovati P, Malekifar A et al. Astigmatism in underserved rural areas: a population based study. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2016; 36(6): 671-9.
19. Yamamoto T, Hiraoka T, Beheregaray S et al. Influence of simple myopic against-the-rule and with-the-rule astigmatism on visual acuity in eyes with monofocal intraocular lenses. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2014; 58(5): 409-14.
20. Serra P, Chisholm C, Sanchez Trancon A et al. Distance and near visual performance in pseudophakic eyes with simulated spherical and astigmatic blur. Clin Exp Optom. 2016; 99(2): 127-34.
21. Trindade F, Oliveira A, Frasson M. Benefit of against-the-rule astigmatism to uncorrected near acuity. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997; 23(1): 82-5.
22. Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Peyman A et al. The association between residual astigmatism and refractive errors in a population-based study. J Refract Surg. 2013; 29(9): 624-8.
23. Thibos LN, Horner D. Power vector analysis of the optical outcome of refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27(1): 80-5.
24. Li B, Peterson MR, Freeman RD. Oblique effect: a neural basis in the visual cortex. J Neurophysiol. 2003; 90(1): 204-17.
25. Heydarian S, Sardari S, Heidari Z et al. Corneal and Ocular Residual Astigmatism in School-Age Children. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2020; 32(4): 355-60.
26. Atchison DA, Guo H, Charman WN et al. Blur limits for defocus, astigmatism and trefoil. Vision Res. 2009; 49(19): 2393-403.
27. Lindeberg TJH. Normative theory of visual receptive fields. 2021; 7(1): e05897.
28. Cho MW, Choi MY. A model for the receptive field of retinal ganglion cells. Neural Networks. 2014; 49: 51-8.