山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (4): 76-80.doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1673-3770.0.2020.432

• • 上一篇    下一篇

未矫正近视性屈光参差患者双眼间调节力对照研究

岳鹏程1,2,杜秋萱1,2,孔玲1,2,乔镇涛1,2   

  1. 山东省医学科学院)/山东省眼科研究所山东省眼科学重点实验室-省部共建国家重点实验室培育基地, 山东 青岛 266071
  • 发布日期:2021-08-05
  • 通讯作者: 乔镇涛. E-mail:zhentaoq@163.com

A controlled Study of the accommodative parameters of eyes with uncorrected myopic anisometropia

YUE Pengcheng1,2, DU Qiuxuan1,2, KONG Ling1,2, QIAO Zhentao1,2   

  1. 1. Qingdao Eye Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Qingdao 266071, Shandong, China;
    2. Shandong Frist Medical University & Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences / State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shandong Eye Institute, Qingdao 266071, Shandong, China
  • Published:2021-08-05

PDF (PC)

217

摘要： 目的 研究近视性屈光参差对双眼调节相关参数的影响。 方法 收集63例从未有屈光矫正史的近视性屈光参差患者作为屈光参差组,两眼间屈光参数无明显差异的患者作为对照组,使用综合验光仪测量患者的单双眼负相对调节、调节反应、正相对调节、调节灵活度、调节幅度并散瞳验光,分析两组间调节相关参数的差异。 结果 屈光参差组患者共34例,高度数眼PRA值为-2.10±0.88,低度数眼为-2.46±0.70,差异有统计学意义(t=2.96,P<0.05);屈光参差组高度数眼调节反应值为+0.51±0.42,低度数眼为+0.35±0.35,差异有统计学意义(Z=-2.45,P<0.05);屈光参差组高度数眼调节灵活度值为4.47±2.38,低度数眼为5.53±3.03,差异有统计学意义(t=-2.42,P<0.05);屈光参差组高度数眼NRA值为+2.21±0.28,低度数眼为+2.21±0.40,差异无统计学意义(Z=-0.43,P>0.05)。对照组患者共29例,双眼间NRA、BCC、PRA、调节灵活度值均无统计学差异(NRA:Z=-0.42,P>0.05)、(BCC:Z=-0.95,P>0.05)、(PRA:Z=-1.37,P>0.05)、(调节灵活度:Z=-0.04,P>0.05)。屈光参差组双眼NRA值+2.39±1.58高于对照组+2.24±0.31(Z=-2.54,P<0.01),双眼PRA值-2.00±0.81高于对照组-2.49±0.72(Z=-2.31,P<0.05);屈光参差组调节反应值+0.38±0.30与对照组+0.41±0.30无统计学差异(Z=-0.58,P>0.05),双眼调节灵活度值4.57±2.50与对照组4.59±2.18差异无统计学意义(Z=-0.04,P>0.05)。 结论 近视性屈光参差会引起患者双眼间调节参数异常。

关键词: 屈光参差, 近视, 调节, 视功能, 未矫正

Abstract: Objective To study the effect of myopic anisometropia on binocular accommodative parameters. Methods The study involved 63 patients with different refractive parameters in their two eyes but no history of refractive correction for anisometropia. They were divided into anisometropia group and control group according to the difference in refractive status. Their cycloplegic refraction were measured using a comprehensive refractometer. The monocular and binocular negative relative accommodation, accommodative responses, positive relative accommodation, accommodative facilities, amplitudes of accommodation, and the differences in adjustment parameters of the two groups were analyzed. Results There were 34 patients in the anisometropia group. The monocular PRA in the eyes with higher degree was -2.10±0.88, and that of the eyes with lower degree was -2.46±0.70; the difference was statistically significant(t=2.96, P<0.05). The monocular accommodative response value of the eyes in the in the eyes with higher degree was +0.51±0.42, and that of the eyes in eyes with lower degree was +0.35±0.35, the difference was statistically significant(Z=-2.45, P<0.05). The monocular accommodative facility of the eyes in the eyes with higher degree was 4.47±2.38, and that of the eyes with lower degree was 5.53±3.03; the difference was statistically significant(t=-2.42, P<0.05). The monocular NRA in the eyes with higher degree was +2.21±0.28, and that of the eyes with lower degree was +2.21±0.40; the difference was not statistically significant(Z=-0.43, P>0.05). There were 29 patients in the control group, they were no statistically significant differences between the NRA, accommodation responses, PRA, and accommodative facilities of the two eyes in the control group(NRA: Z=-0.42, P>0.05; accommodative response: Z=-0.95, P>0.05; PRA: Z=-1.37, P>0.05; accommodative facility: Z=-0.04, P> 0.05). The binocular NRA of the anisometropia group was +2.39±1.58, whereas that of the control group was +2.24±0.31; the difference was statistically significant(Z=-2.54, P<0.01). The binocular PRA was -2.00±0.81 in the anisometropia group and -2.49±0.81 in the control group; the difference was statistically significant(Z=-2.31, P<0.05). The binocular accommodative response was +0.38±0.30 in the anisometropia group and +0.41±0.30 in the control group; the difference was not statistically significant(Z=-0.58, P>0.05). The binocular flexibility was 4.57±2.50 in the anisometropia group and 4.59±2.18 in the control group, and the difference was not statistically significant(Z=-0.04, P>0.05). Conclusion Myopic anisometropia may cause abnormal interbinocular accommodative parameters.

Key words: Myopia, Anisometropia, Accommodation, Vision function parameters, Uncorrected

中图分类号: 

  • R778.1
[1] Deng L, Gwiazda JE. Anisometropia in children from infancy to 15 years[J]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2012, 53(7): 3782-3787. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-8727.
[2] Press LJ. Relationship between anisometropia, amblyopia, and binocularity[J]. Optom Vis Sci, 1999, 76(10): 677. doi:10.1097/00006324-199910000-00016.
[3] Vincent SJ, Collins MJ, Read SA, et al. Myopic anisometropia: ocular characteristics and aetiological considerations[J]. Clin Exp Optom, 2014, 97(4): 291-307. doi:10.1111/cxo.12171.
[4] 陈梦兰, 何花, 刘芸. 屈光参差儿童的斜视、弱视特征及立体视功能的差异性分析[J]. 华中科技大学学报(医学版), 2020, 49(5): 602-608. doi:10.3870/j.issn.1672-0741.2020.05.017. CHEN Menglan, HE Hua, LIU Yun. Differences and characteristics of strabismus, amblyopia and stereoscopic vision function in children with anisometropia[J]. Acta Med Univ Sci et Technol Huazhong, 2020, 49(5): 602-608. doi:10.3870/j.issn.1672-0741.2020.05.017.
[5] 熊佳伟, 周行涛, 莫晓芬. 儿童屈光参差临床研究进展[J]. 中国眼耳鼻喉科杂志, 2017, 17(4): 288-291. doi:10.14166/j.issn.1671-2420.2017.04.017. XIONG Jiawei, ZHOU Xingtao, MO Xiaofen. Clinical research progresses of children's anisometropia[J]. Chin J Ophthalmol Otorhinolaryngol, 2017,17(4): 288-291. doi:10.14166/j.issn.1671-2420.2017.04.017.
[6] Kuo NW, Shen CJ, Sheu SJ. The ocular biometric and corneal topographic characteristics of high-anisometropic adults in Taiwan[J]. J Chin Med Assoc, 2011, 74(7): 310-315. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2011.05.007.
[7] Xu SZ, Xu AQ, Tao AZ, et al. Corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure in high myopic anisometropia[J]. Eye Contact Lens, 2010, 36(4): 204-209. doi:10.1097/ICL.0b013e3181e4a60a.
[8] Mutti DO, Mitchell GL, Moeschberger ML, et al. Parental myopia, near work, school achievement, and children's refractive error[J]. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2002, 43(12): 3633-3640.
[9] Shapira Y, Vainer I, Mimouni M, et al. Effect of anisometropia on the predictability and accuracy of refractive surgery[J]. Cornea, 2016, 35(11): 1410-1415. doi:10.1097/ico.0000000000000974.
[10] Horwood AM, Riddell PM. Independent and reciprocal accommodation in anisometropic amblyopia[J]. J Am Assoc Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus, 2010, 14(5): 447-449. doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2010.07.003.
[11] 傅佳, 武晶晶, 郭寅, 等. 近视性屈光参差主导眼的屈光状态及其调节功能[J]. 眼科, 2016, 25(2): 102-105. doi:10.13281/j.cnki.issn.1004-4469.2016.02.008. FU Jia, WU Jingjing, GUO Yin, et al. Refractive status and its accommodation of dominant eye in myopic anisometropia[J]. Ophthalmol China, 2016, 25(2): 102-105. doi:10.13281/j.cnki.issn.1004-4469.2016.02.008.
[12] 徐丹, 姜俭, 阎静, 等. 近视性屈光参差者双眼调节反应的研究[J]. 中华眼科杂志, 2009, 45(7): 612-615. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2009.07.007. XU Dan, JIANG Jian, YAN Jing, et al. Analyze of the accommodative response in myopia anisometropes[J]. Chin J Ophthalmol, 2009, 45(7): 612-615. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2009.07.007.
[13] Toor S, Horwood A, Riddell P. The effect of asymmetrical accommodation on anisometropic amblyopia treatment outcomes[J]. J Am Assoc Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus, 2019, 23(4): 203.e1-203.e5. doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2019.05.010.
[14] 陈云云, 丁程璐, 保金华, 等. 儿童近视进展与调节功能的关系[J]. 温州医科大学学报, 2020, 50(6): 461-464,470. doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-9400.2020.06.006. CHEN Yunyun, DING Chenglu, BAO Jinhua, et al. Study on the relationship between myopia progression and accommodative functions in children[J]. J Wenzhou Med Univ, 2020, 50(6): 461-464,470. doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-9400.2020.06.006.
[15] 李瑞凤, 刘桂香, 万鲁芹. 实验近视性屈光参差对双眼视功能的影响[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2012, 26(3): 72-74. doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1673-3770.2012.03.024. LI Ruifeng, LIU Guixiang, WAN Luqin. Influence of experimental myopic anisometropia on binocular visual function[J]. Journal of Otolaryngology and Ophthalmology of Shandong University, 2012, 26(3): 72-74. doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1673-3770.2012.03.024.
[16] Bharadwaj SR, Candy TR. The effect of lens-induced anisometropia on accommodation and vergence during human visual development[J]. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2011, 52(6): 3595-3603. doi:10.1167/iovs.10-6214.
[17] Charman WN. Aniso-accommodation as a possible factor in myopia development[J]. Oph Phys Optics, 2004, 24(5): 471-479. doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.2004.00205.x.
[18] Childress ME, Childress CW, Conklin RM. Possible effects of visual demand on refractive error[J]. J Am Optom Assoc, 1970, 41(4): 348-353.
[19] Harris P. Visual conditions of symphony musicians[J]. J Am Optom Assoc, 1988, 59(12): 952-959.
[20] 李丹,赵桁,李杰,等. 低度近视性屈光参差不同矫正方式的调节功能研究[J]. 国际眼科杂志,2021,21(4):730-733. doi:10.3980 /j.issn.1672-5123.2021.4.35. LI Dan, ZHAO Heng, LI Jie, et al. Study of the accommodative difference between wearing orthokeratology lens and frame lens in low myopic anisometropia children[J]. Int Eye Sci, 2021, 21(4): 730-733. doi:10.3980 /j.issn.1672-5123.2021.4.35.
[21] HAN Xiaoxia, XU Dongjun, GE Weizhong, et al. A Comparison of the effects of orthokeratology lens, medcall lens, and ordinary frame glasses on the accommodative response in myopic children.[J]. Eye Contact Lens, 2018, 44: 268-271. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000390.
[22] 蓝方方,赵武校,甘露. 角膜塑形镜对青少年近视眼调节参数的影响[J]. 中国临床新医学,2017,10(1):15-18. doi:10.3969 /j. issn.1674-3806.2017.01.05.
[23] 刘俐娜,钟兴武,胡施思,等. 屈光参差儿童单眼配戴角膜塑形镜后调节功能的变化[J]. 国际眼科杂志, 2020,20(6):1040-1043. doi:10.3980/j.issn.1672-5123.2020.6.25. Liu LN, Zhong XW, Hu SS, et al. Effect on the accommodation function of monocular orthokeratology in anisometropic children[J]. Int Eye Sci, 2020, 20(6):1040-1043 doi:10.3980/j.issn.1672-5123.2020.6.25.
[24] Koh LH, Charman WN. Accommodative responses to anisoaccommodative targets[J]. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 2008, 18(3): 254-262. doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.1998.00329.x.
[25] Vincent SJ, Collins MJ, Read SA, et al. Interocular symmetry in myopic anisometropia[J]. Optom Vis Sci, 2011: 1. doi:10.1097/opx.0b013e318233ee5f.
[1] 代诚李宾中. 多焦点软性角膜接触镜应用研究进展[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2022, 36(5): 100-105.
[2] 张陶然,王薇,李明铭,黄映湘. IVR治疗mCNV患者黄斑中心凹下脉络膜厚度分析[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2022, 36(2): 68-71.
[3] 彭娇,钟定娟,陈蛟,左筠,王华. 光学区直径与暗瞳直径的关系对不同程度近视患者SMILE术后视觉质量的影响[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2022, 36(2): 100-107.
[4] 张依,王文俊，杨安怀. SIRT1激动剂白藜芦醇在眼部疾病中的研究进展[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2022, 36(2): 151-156.
[5] 李莹. 重视角膜屈光手术操作规范及并发症防治[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(6): 1-6.
[6] 张颖,雷玉琳,马志兴,杨星花,张静,侯杰. SMILE联合快速角膜交联术后角膜光密度的早期临床观察[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(6): 52-58.
[7] 刘艺,于明坤,孙伟,邵震,胡媛媛,毕宏生. 角膜塑形术控制儿童近视有效性与安全性的Meta分析[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(6): 92-100.
[8] 海玥,廖萱. Catquest-9SF的研究进展及临床应用[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(6): 142-146.
[9] 冉宏运,蒋可可，张杰. 早产儿视网膜病变患儿屈光影响因素研究进展[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(5): 118-124.
[10] 刘凌，张美霞. 近视的药物治疗[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2021, 35(4): 123-128.
[11] 任雨馨赵博军. 病理性近视脉络膜新生血管的诊断与治疗[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2020, 34(5): 157-162.
[12] 李莹,姜洋. 惟论近视矫正眼外与眼内手术方式的选择[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2020, 34(2): 1-6.
[13] 万博,李东辉,罗岩,李莹. 中心孔型有晶状体眼后房型人工晶体植入术后拱高变化及相关因素分析[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2020, 34(2): 36-41.
[14] 王暄琪. 可植入式眼内镜术后拱高及相关因素[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2020, 34(2): 72-78.
[15] 张丹凤. 青少年近视散瞳前后眼球生物参数变化的分析[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2019, 33(5): 121-124.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张晗,黄一飞 . 抗角膜移植排斥的研究进展[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2006, 20(1): 84 -87 .
[2] 牛善利,柴茂文,李振秀 . 鼻内镜下鼻甲成形术治疗慢性肥厚性鼻炎60例[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2006, 20(1): 16 -18 .
[3] 孟庆国,卢永田,范献良 . 杀伤细胞免疫球蛋白样受体基因多态性与鼻咽癌的关联性[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 196 -199 .
[4] 马玉起,孔祥春 . 先天性双侧下唇窦道1例[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 199 -199 .
[5] 万俐佳,鲁海涛,姜义道,刘 辉,李 琴,佘腊枝 . 改良腭咽成形术治疗阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征41例[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 204 -205 .
[6] 于青青 ,王跃建 . 硬质耳内镜的临床应用进展[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 222 -224 .
[7] 吉晓滨,邓家德,臧林泉,王 磊,谢 军 . 豚鼠变应性鼻炎模型血清组胺的测定[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 228 -230 .
[8] 向登,卢永田,孙焕吉 . 鼻内镜下修补脑脊液鼻漏19例并文献复习[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 234 -236 .
[9] 邱恩惠,李志春,方文旭 . 嗅觉障碍的中西医治疗[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 253 -257 .
[10] 殷国华,钟 笑 . 激光减容术治疗舌扁桃体肥大的远期疗效[J]. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2008, 22(3): 280 -282 .
网站版权所有 © 2018 《山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报》编辑部　
地址：山东省济南市山大南路27号（250100）电话：+86-0531-88366912 E-mail: ebhxb@sdu.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发