Distribution of the Crystalline Lens Power In Vivo as a Function of Age

Abstract

PURPOSE.To observe the age-related changes in crystalline lens power in vivo in a noncataractous European population.METHODS. Data were obtained though Project Gullstrand, a multicenter population study with data from healthy phakic subjects between 20 and 85 years old. One randomly selected eye per subject was used. Lens power was calculated using the modified Bennett-Rabbetts method, using biometry data from an autorefractometer, Oculus Pentacam, and Haag-Streit Lenstar.RESULTS. The study included 1069 Caucasian subjects (490 men, 579 women) with a mean age of 44.2 6 14.2 years and mean lens power of 24.96 6 2.18 diopters (D). The average lens power showed a statistically significant decrease as a function of age, with a steeper rate of decrease after the age of 55. The highest crystalline lens power was found in emmetropic eyes and eyes with a short axial length. The correlation of lens power with different refractive components was statistically significant for axial length (r ¼ À0.523, P < 0.01) and anterior chamber depth (r ¼ À0.161, P < 0.01), but not for spherical equivalent and corneal power (P > 0.05).CONCLUSIONS. This in vivo study showed a monotonous decrease in crystalline lens power with age, with a steeper decline after 55 years. While this finding fundamentally concurs with previous in vivo studies, it is at odds with studies performed on donor eyes that reported lens power increases after the age of 55.

The Associations of Lens Power With Age and Axial Length in Healthy Chinese Children and Adolescents Aged 6 to 18 Years

“…10,24 To account for the influence of the posterior cornea on the lens power calculation, the total corneal power was calculated from the anterior and posterior radii using a refractive index of 1.376. 14,26 The calculated lens powers were in relatively close agreement with the values obtained by Iribarren 4 who calculated corneal power from the anterior corneal radius using a refractive index of 1.3315, but found to be greater than that of another study that used the anterior corneal radius and a refractive index of 1.328 (lens power of 23.08 D on average). 12 This difference might be due to the older age (~14-years old) and higher prevalence of myopia (mean SE of À2.10 D) used in the latter (Li et al 12 ) sample.…”

“…9,10 These methods enable relatively accurate estimates of lens power in vivo, and thus, estimations of the characteristics of lens power from infancy to adulthood. [2][3][4][11][12][13][14][15] According to previous studies, during the early childhood development period, the lens loses power from infancy to school age at a rapid rate that slowly but continually decreases from ages 10 to 14. 3,4,11 In adulthood, the lens power exhibits a monotonous decrease with age with a steeper decline after age 50.…”

“…3,4,11 In adulthood, the lens power exhibits a monotonous decrease with age with a steeper decline after age 50. 13,14 However, the changes in lens power in adolescents aged 14 to 18 years have not yet been reported. Additionally, the relationship between the change in lens power and axial elongation is controversial.…”

How Abnormal Is the Noncorneal Biometry of Keratoconic Eyes?

“…This is only possible if at the same time the crystalline lens would have reduced power by about 1D, which is far more than the 0.12D per 5 years normally seen in subjects of that age. 24 As the mean lens power in keratoconic and healthy eyes did not differ significantly from each other (Table 1), these results seem rather unlikely. Similarly, Italon et al 25 reported a 0.2-mm increase in vitreous depth 2 years after PK in 30 eyes.…”

Impact of internal curvature gradient on the power and accommodation of the crystalline lens

“…The human crystalline lens has a complex GRIN internal structure and shows substantial changes both with age and accommodation [1]. The power of young lenses can increase by 50% or even more during accommodation, whereas the lens tends to lose power with age [2]. An important open question is how much of these changes are due to its GRIN structure.…”