Relevance of pupil size in the clinical determination of retinal straylight on young healthy human eyes

García‐Lázaro, Santiago; Ferrer-Blasco, Teresa; Ortí-Navarro, Susana; Cerviño, Alejandro; Montés‐Micó, Robert

doi:10.1007/s00417-009-1258-4

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, by subtracting Equation 1 in its entirety, one can define the base, age, and axial lengthcorrected (BALC) straylight in which the influence of axial length has been compensated as well. Pupil size was not taken into account as Franssen et al 26 and Garcia-Lazaro et al 27 demonstrated that no correction for pupil size is required for a C-Quant straylight meter when estimating average amounts of retinal straylight from samples of eyes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Macular Pigment on Retinal Straylight in Healthy Eyes

Jongenelen

Rozema

Tassignon

2013

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Macular Pigment on Retinal Straylight in Healthy Eyes

Jongenelen

Rozema

Tassignon

2013

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies showed the independence between retinal straylight and other visual functions, as visual acuity and contrast sensitivity [8]; there was no relation also with slit-lamp based examinations [8,9] and with normal pupil diameter at photopic conditions [10,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

South American Values of the Optical Straylight Function

Bitencourt

Oiwa

Ventura

et al. 2019

Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To access retinal straylight in a Brazilian sample and to compare it with European norms. Methods: Absolute Straylight was assessed using C-Quant that uses an adaptive staircase based on a 2-Alternated Forced Choice task. A young (22.2 ± 2.4 yrs, n = 20) and an old group (53.8 ± 7.4 yrs, n = 21) of subjects were tested. All refractive errors were corrected in the C-Quant device, and no subjects had ocular diseases or vision-threatening conditions (e.g., diabetes, unregulated blood pressure, high intraocular pressure, visible cataract). Eighty-five percent of all subjects in each age group had dark-pigmented eyes. Each eye was tested 3 times, yielding 6 straylight values (s). Only data fulfilling C-Quant reliability criteria were included. Results: There were no statistical differences between the three attempts on each eye (ANOVA, F = 0.993, p > 0.936) and between the two groups (ANOVA, F = 0.893, p > 0.725). Straylight values (s) were fit with an empirical equation to compare to European norms. There were no statistical differences between Brazilian straylight values and European norms for either young or old age groups (ANOVA, F = 5.114, p > 0.993). However, there was a tendency for our s values to be higher than the European norms, consistent with young Brazilian eyes having more light-scattering than age-matched European eyes. Conclusions: Consistent with European norms, light-scattering increases with age in the Brazilian sample. This increase is thought to be due, in large part, to age-related changes in lens structure and density. Although the differences between the populations are not significant, the tendency for Brazilian data to have higher s values than European values, especially at young subjects, is in the opposite direction from that expected from a dark-eyed population. This suggests the hypothesis that latitude-dependent (Sao Paulo, latitude 23° S, European latitudes between 40° N to 55° N) differences in the light environment could be associated with differences in s values.

show abstract

“…This result is consistent with previous studies. Garcia‐Lazaro et al reported that stray light values measured with the Van den Berg stray light meter are not significantly affected by the pupil size of the subject. Meikies et al also reported no correlation between pupil size and disability glare with the Rostock Glare Perimeter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%