Abstract
We compared the depth of the anterior chamber and the optimal distance refraction in a group of patients with soft and rigid intraocular implants under pilocarpine (maximal ciliary contraction) and cyclopentolate (maximal ciliary relaxation) in order to determine if lens movement might account for the apparent accommodation phenomenon. Lens shifts ranging from 1.5 to 0.02 mm and refractive variations up to 1 D were found. However, the discrepancies between amount of shift and refractive variations suggest that lens movement does not play a relevant role in this phenomenon.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barret G, Beasley H, Lorenzitti J, Rosental A (1987) Multicenter trial of an intraocular hydrogel lens implant. J Cataract Refract Surg 6:621–626
Binkhorst RD (1981) Intraocular lens power calculation manual — a guide to the author's TI-58/51 power module, 2nd edn. Binkhorst, New York
Fisher RF (1986) The ciliary body in accommodation. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 105:208–219
Hardman Lea SJ, Rubinstein MP, Snead MP, Harworths M (1990) Pseudophakic accommodation? A study of the stability of capsular bag supported, one piece, rigid tripod, or soft flexible implants. Br J Ophthalmol 74:22–25
Huber C (1981) Planned myopic astigmatism as a substitute for accommodation in pseudophakia. J Am Intraoc Implant Soc 7:244–247
Katz M (1987) The human eye as an optical system. In: Duane T (ed) I. Clinical ophthalmology. Harper & Row, Philadelphia, pp 17–22
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Offprint requests to: F. Gonzalez
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gonzalez, F., Capeans, C., Santos, L. et al. Anteroposterior shift in rigid and soft implants supported by the intraocular capsular bag. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 230, 237–239 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00176296
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00176296