Assessment of visual performance in pseudophakic monovision

Ito, Misae; Shimizu, Kimiya; Amano, Rie; Handa, Tomoya

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.12.019

Cited by 55 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are different opinions on whether the dominant eye should be corrected for distance or near vision. [45][46][47][48] Correction for distance would allow for better binocular summation at middle distances and near stereoacuity since the signals from the eyes are roughly equally blurred. 49 This study's results further indicate that ocular dominance has a greater effect on the integration time needed to achieve best stereoacuity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balanced Eyes See Stereopsis More Quickly, but Not More Finely

Bai

Zhang

et al. 2018

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE. To quantify ocular sensory dominance and investigate its relationship to stereopsis. METHOD.A total of 69 subjects participated in the study. Ocular dominance was measured by a continuous flashing technique, with the tested eye viewing a Gabor patch increasing in contrast, and the fellow eye viewing a Mondrian noise decreasing in contrast. In each trial, the log ratio of Mondrian to Gabor's contrasts was recorded as a subject first detected the Gabor. We collected 50 trials for each eye and an interocular difference was analyzed with a rank-sum test. The z-value was used as the ocular dominance index (ODI) to quantify the degree of ocular dominance. A subject with ODI ‡ 2 was categorized as having a clear ocular dominance, and a subject with ODI < 2 was considered as having balanced eyes (unclear dominance). The stereoacuity was measured with random dot patterns with durations varying from 50 to 1000 ms. The best achievable stereoacuity (D min ) and the integration time needed to acquire that (T min ) were calculated. RESULTS.A total of 30 subjects had balanced eyes and 39 had clear ocular dominance. T min was significantly longer in subjects with clear ocular dominance than in subjects with balanced eyes (180.18 vs. 121.17 ms, P < 0.01). T min was positively correlated with ODI (P < 0.01). However, D min in subjects with clear dominance was not different from that in subjects with balanced eyes (40.60 vs. 35.73 arcsec, P ¼ 0.18).CONCLUSIONS. Ocular dominance is not associated with how fine the stereoacuity is, but rather how quickly the best stereoacuity is acquired.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balanced Eyes See Stereopsis More Quickly, but Not More Finely

Bai

Zhang

et al. 2018

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22,23 Monovision can be implemented with contact lenses, 22,24,25 corneal refractive surgery, [26][27][28][29] or monofocal IOLs following crystalline lens removal in cataract surgery. 20,[30][31][32] Despite decades of clinical application, the ideal degree of anisometropia in monovision is still a topic of active research. 19,20,33,34 The optimal power difference between the two eyes has been reported to vary between 1.0 and 2.0 diopters (D), depending on the need according to the patient's lifestyle or occupation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modified Monovision With Spherical Aberration to Improve Presbyopic Through-Focus Visual Performance

Zheleznyak

Sabesan

et al. 2013

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE.To investigate the impact on visual performance of modifying monovision with monocularly induced spherical aberration (SA) to increase depth of focus (DoF), thereby enhancing binocular through-focus visual performance. METHODS.A binocular adaptive optics (AO) vision simulator was used to correct both eyes' native aberrations and induce traditional (TMV) and modified (MMV) monovision corrections. TMV was simulated with 1.5 diopters (D) of anisometropia (dominant eye at distance, nondominant eye at near). Zernike primary SA was induced in the nondominant eye in MMV. A total of four MMV conditions were tested with various amounts of SA (60.2 and 60.4 lm) and fixed anisometropia (1.5 D). Monocular and binocular visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) at 10 cyc/deg and binocular summation were measured through-focus in three cyclopledged subjects with 4-mm pupils.RESULTS. MMV with positive SA had a larger benefit for intermediate distances (1.5 lines at 1.0 D) than with negative SA, compared with TMV. Negative SA had a stronger benefit in VA at near. DoF of all MMV conditions was 3.5 6 0.5 D (mean) as compared with TMV (2.7 6 0.3 D). Through-focus CS at 10 cyc/deg was significantly reduced with MMV as compared to TMV only at intermediate object distances, however was unaffected at distance. Binocular summation was absent at all object distances except 0.5 D, where it improved in MMV by 19% over TMV. CONCLUSIONS.Modified monovision with SA improves through-focus VA and DoF as compared with traditional monovision. Binocular summation also increased as interocular similarity of image quality increased due to extended monocular DoF.Keywords: aberrations, presbyopia, monovision, binocular adaptive optics P resbyopia, the age-related loss of accommodation, mostly affects the population aged over approximately 50 years.

show abstract

“…Although more than 80% of the 82 patients in our previous pseudophakic monovision study 17 were satisfied with their outcomes, a relative decrease in stereopsis was reported. Therefore, adjustment tests (eg, patient selection and surgical plan) should be performed before surgery to ensure maintenance of postoperative visual performance.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…In addition, monovision sometimes affects visual performance because of incomplete blur suppression and may decrease stereopsis. 1,2,[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][19][20][21]23,A Handa et al 15 found an 80% satisfaction rate among patients who had pseudophakic monovision and that "weak ocular dominance" was important for the success of the procedure. This procedure quantitatively evaluates sensory dominance using a balancing technique in which the contrast sensitivity in the dominant eye during binocular rivalry is decreased to the same level as that in the nondominant eye.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%