Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Anisometropia”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1990

Anisometropia and changes in anisometropia in school myopia.

Human anisometropia and changes in it were followed over a 3-year period in 238 schoolchildren who had uncomplicated school myopia in both eyes. Anisometropia of the spherical equivalent (ASFE) type increased in 27%, decreased in 6%, and remained unchanged in 67% of these children. When mean myopia increased from -1.43 to -3.06 D, mean ASFE increased from 0.30 to 0.51 D and the anisometropia of astigmatism (AAST) from 0.15 to 0.23 D. The faster the increase in myopia the greater was the increase in ASFE (r = 0.133, N = 238, p = 0.020). The higher the spherical equivalent at the end of the study the higher was the ASFE (r = 0.135, N = 238, p = 0.019). The initial refractive error or the amount or the axis of astigmatism did not have any prognostic value for the changes in ASFE. The higher the ASFE at the end of the study the higher also was the AAST (r = 0.136, N = 238, p = 0.018). The change in ASFE was independent of the wearing of spectacles. The distribution of the anisometropia of the spherical equivalent and its change followed a nearly normal distribution with the peak of eyes at about +/- 0 refraction.

Anisometropia↗
PubMed2001

The role of anisometropia in the development of accommodative esotropia.

PURPOSE: To determine whether anisometropia increases the risk for the development of accommodative esotropia with hypermetropia. METHODS: Records of all new patients with a refractive error of +2.00 D or more (mean spherical equivalent of both eyes) over a 42-month period were reviewed. Three hundred forty-five patients were thus analyzed to determine the effect of anisometropia (>or=1 D) on the relative risk of developing accommodative esotropia and of developing unsatisfactory control with spectacles once esotropia was present. RESULTS: Anisometropia (>or=1 D) increased the relative risk of developing accommodative esotropia to 1.68 (P < .05). Anisometropia (>or=1 D) increased the relative risk for esotropia to 7.8 (P < .05) in patients with a mean spherical equivalent less than +3.00 D and increased it to 1.49 (P < .05) in patients with a mean spherical equivalent of +3.00 D or more (P = .016). In patients with esotropia and anisometropia (>or=1 D), the relative risk for a deviation that was unsatisfactorily controlled with spectacles was 1.72 (P < .05) compared with patients with esotropia but without anisometropia. Unsatisfactorily controlled esotropia was present in 33% of patients with anisometropia versus 0% of patients without anisometropia, with a mean hypermetropic spherical equivalent of less than +3.00 D (P = .003); however, anisometropia did not significantly increase the relative risk of unsatisfactory control of esotropia with spectacles in patients with a hypermetropic spherical equivalent of +3.00 D or more. Although amblyopia and anisometropia were closely associated, anisometropia increased the relative risk for esotropia to 2.14 (P < .05), even in the absence of amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: Anisometropia (>or=1 D) is a significant risk factor for the development of accommodative esotropia, especially in patients with lower overall hypermetropia (>+3.00 D). Anisometropia also increases the risk that an accommodative esotropia will not be satisfactorily aligned with spectacles.

Accommodation, Ocular↗
PubMed2001

The association between nonstrabismic anisometropia, amblyopia, and subnormal binocularity.

PURPOSE: To determine if thresholds exist for the development of amblyopia and subnormal binocularity with various types of anisometropia and to compare these with existing guidelines for the treatment or observation of anisometropia. DESIGN: The records of all previously untreated patients evaluated for isolated refractive error during a 42-month period were reviewed to assess the association between anisometropia, amblyopia, and subnormal binocularity. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred sixty-one (361) patients with anisometropia and 50 nonanisometropic control participants, examined over a 42-month period, with no history of treatment for refractive error, amblyopia, or other ocular pathologic characteristics were evaluated. METHODS: Uncorrected visual acuity in each eye, monofixation response, and degree of stereopsis were recorded for each patient. Patients with unequal or subnormal uncorrected visual acuity were retested with cycloplegic refraction. If the visual acuity was still abnormal, patients were retested while wearing spectacles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Degree and type of anisometropia were compared with incidence and severity of amblyopia and subnormal binocularity. RESULTS: Spherical myopic anisometropia (SMA) of more than 2 diopters (D) or spherical hypermetropic anisometropia (SHA) of more than 1 D results in a significant increase in the incidence of amblyopia and decrease in binocular function when compared with nonanisometropic patients (P = 0.05). Increasing levels of SMA and SHA beyond these thresholds result in increased incidence and severity of amblyopia. Cylindrical myopic anisometropia (CMA) or cylindrical hyperopic anisometropia (CHA) of more than 1.5 D results in a significant increase in amblyopia and a decrease in binocular function (P = 0.05). Levels of CMA and CHA more than 1.5 D result in an increased incidence and severity of amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports existing guidelines for the treatment or observation of anisometropia and characterizes the association between the type and degree of anisometropia and the incidence and severity of amblyopia and subnormal binocularity.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The effects of experimentally induced anisometropia on stereopsis.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of experimentally induced anisometropia on stereopsis in healthy adults to assess the potentially detrimental effects of uncorrected anisometropia on the development of stereoacuity during childhood. METHODS: Twenty-one healthy adult volunteers ranging in age from 22-34 years (mean: 27 years) and free of ocular disease participated in the study. Four different types of anisometropia (unilateral myopia, unilateral hyperopia, or unilateral astigmatism [90 degrees or 45 degrees]) were induced in random order by placing trial lenses over the right eye in 1 diopter (D) increments ranging from 1-3 D. Stereoacuity was measured using the Titmus stereotest with patients placing the cross-polarizing stereoacuity glasses over their lenses or trial frames. RESULTS: Stereoacuity levels were reduced in proportion to the degree of anisometropia in all patients. One diopter of spherical anisometropia reduced stereoacuity to an average 57-59 arc seconds; 1 D of cylindrical anisometropia reduced stereoacuity to an average 51-56 arc seconds. Three diopters of anisometropia, regardless of type, produced a marked reduction of stereoacuity in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Low levels of anisometropia, both spherical and astigmatic, can have potentially significant adverse effects on high-grade binocular interaction in adults. Foveal suppression, which is directly related to the degree of anisometropia, may be responsible for the loss of stereopsis. The data suggest the effects of anisometropia on stereopsis should be considered in the empiric correction of anisometropic refractive errors in children.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The association between anisometropia, amblyopia, and binocularity in the absence of strabismus.

PURPOSE: First, to determine if thresholds exist for the development of amblyopia and subnormal binocularity with various types of anisometropia and to confirm or refute existing guidelines for its treatment or observation. Second, to delineate any association between the degree or type of anisometropia and the depth of amblyopia and severity of binocular sensory abnormalities. METHODS: Four hundred eleven (411) patients with various levels of anisometropia, no previous therapy, and no other ocular pathology were evaluated. The effect of anisometropia (both corrected and uncorrected) on monocular acuity and binocular function was examined. RESULTS: Spherical myopic anisometropia (SMA) of > 2 diopters (D) or spherical hypermetropic anisometropia (SHA) of > 1 D results in a statistically significant increase in the incidence of amblyopia and decrease in binocular function when compared to non anisometropic patients. Increasing levels of SMA and SHA beyond these thresholds were also associated with increasing depth (and in the case of SHA, incidence as well) of amblyopia. Cylindrical myopic anisometropia (CMA) or cylindrical hyperopic anisometropia (CHA) of > 1.5 D results in a statistically significant increase in amblyopia and decrease in binocular function. A clinically significant increase in amblyopia occurs with > 1 D of CMA or CHA. Increasing levels of CMA and CHA beyond > 1 D were also associated with an increased incidence (and in the case of SMA, depth as well) of amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides guidelines for the treatment or observation of anisometropia and confirms and characterizes the association between the type and degree of anisometropia and the incidence and severity of amblyopia and subnormal binocularity.

Amblyopia↗
PubMed2000

The role of anisometropia in the development of accommodative esotropia.

PURPOSE: To determine if anisometropia increases the risk for the development of accommodative esotropia in hypermetropia. METHODS: Records of all new patients with a refractive error of > or = +2.00 (mean spherical equivalent [SE] of both eyes) over a 42-month period were reviewed. Three hundred forty-five (345) patients were thus analyzed to determine the effect of anisometropia (> or = 1 diopter [D]) on the relative risk of developing esodeviation and of requiring surgical correction once esodeviation was present (uncontrolled deviation). RESULTS: Anisometropia (> or = 1 D) increased the relative risk of developing accommodative esodeviation to 1.68 (P < .05). Anisometropia (> or = 1 D) increased the relative risk for esodeviation to 7.8 (P < .05) in patients with a mean SE of < 3 D and to 1.49 (P < .05) in patients with SE of > or = 3 D. This difference was significant (P = .016). In patients with esotropia and anisometropia (> or = 1 D), the relative risk for an uncontrolled deviation was 1.72 (P < .05) compared with nonanisometropic esotropic patients. Uncontrolled esodeviation was present in 33% of anisometropic patients versus 0% of nonanisometropic patients with a mean hypermetropic SE of < 3 D (P = .003); however, anisometropia did not increase the relative risk of uncontrolled esotropia in patients with SE of > or = 3 D. Although amblyopia and anisometropia were closely associated, anisometropia increased the relative risk of esodeviation to 2.14 (P < .05) even in the absence of amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: Anisometropia (> 1 D) is a significant risk factor for the development of accommodative esodeviation, especially in patients with lower overall hypermetropia (< 3 D). Anisometropia also increases the risk that an accommodative esodeviation will not be fully eliminated with hypermetropic correction.

Accommodation, Ocular↗
PubMed2006

Development of astigmatism and anisometropia in preterm children during the first 10 years of life: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the development of astigmatism and anisometropia to 10 years of age in preterm children, previously included in a population-based study on the incidence of retinopathy of prematurity. METHODS: Cycloplegic retinoscopies were performed in 198 preterm children at 6 months, 2(1/2) years, and 10 years of age. We analyzed the development of astigmatism of 1 diopter (D) or more and anisometropia of 1 D or more. RESULTS: The amount and prevalence of astigmatism declined between 6 months and 2(1/2) years of age and then remained stable. We found no difference in the course of astigmatism at different ages with regard to stage of retinopathy of prematurity. The amount of anisometropia increased, but its prevalence remained unchanged. Multiple regression analyses showed that astigmatism of 1 D or more at 2(1/2) years of age and cryotreated severe retinopathy of prematurity were risk factors for astigmatism at 10 years of age, and that anisometropia of 2 D or more at 2(1/2) years of age was a risk factor for anisometropia at 10 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: The development of astigmatism and anisometropia showed a similar course, regardless of stage of retinopathy of prematurity. The retinoscopy findings at 6 months of age were of no value in predicting astigmatism and anisometropia at 10 years of age, but the refraction at 2(1/2) years of age was. Retinoscopy at about 2(1/2) years of age in all preterm children may be useful for detecting astigmatism and anisometropia that will persist in children of school age.

Anisometropia↗
PubMed2004

Anisometropia in Singapore school children.

PURPOSE: To report the prevalence rates of anisometropia in a school population and determine the relative contribution of refractive power and axial length to the measured anisometropia. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. METHODS: Autorefraction, keratometry, and ultrasonography studies were made. SETTING: Three schools, located on the eastern, northern, and western part of Singapore. STUDY POPULATION: In all, 1,979 children aged 7 to 9 years were recruited for this study. The study sample included Chinese (n = 1,481), Malay (n = 324), and Asian Indian (n = 174) children; 720 subjects have myopia (spherical equivalent <= -0.5 diopters) in at least one eye. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Anisometropia. RESULTS: The prevalence rates of anisometropia, in terms of spherical equivalent (SE) difference of at least 1.5 diopters and 2.0 diopters were 1.57% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1, 2.2) and 1.01% (95% CI: 0.6, 1.6), respectively. The prevalence rate of anisometropia (at least 2.0 diopters) among the children with at least one myopic eye was 2.4% (95% CI: 1.4, 3.8), whereas in those without any myopic eyes, the prevalence rate was only 0.2% (95% CI: 0.06, 0.8). The spherical equivalent difference between the right and left eyes was positively correlated with the difference in axial lengths (P <.001). The difference in corneal refractive power is not statistically different between the anisometropic and the nonanisometropic children. CONCLUSIONS: The anisometropia prevalence rate in a childhood population with a relatively high prevalence of myopia was reported. The origin of the anisometropia is axial, and these results suggest that the differential rate of elongation between the two eyes of nonmyopic subjects results in anisometropia.

Anisometropia↗
PubMed1996

Anisometropia and binocularity.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of experimentally induced anisometropia on binocular function in healthy adults as a means of assessing the potentially detrimental effects of uncorrected anisometropia on binocular development in childhood. METHODS: Nineteen adults with normal binocularity, ranging in age from 26 to 59 years, were studied. Unilateral myopia, hyperopia, or astigmatism (at 90 degrees or 45 degrees) was induced in each subject using trial lenses. Sensory status then was assessed by measuring stereoacuity, Worth four-dot fusion, and Bagolini lens response. RESULTS: All subjects showed a decline in binocular function with increasing levels of anisometropia. Foveal suppression was evident on the Worth four-dot test, and increased in proportion to the anisometropia. Stereoacuity was similarly degraded by the induced anisometropia, with some subjects showing significant loss of stereoacuity with as little as 1 diopter of spherical anisometropia. Bagolini lens responses were binocular in almost all patients, although occasional abnormalities were found. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively low degrees of anisometropia may cause significant abnormalities in high-grade binocular visual functions in adults. The potential effects of uncorrected anisometropia on binocularity in children require further investigation, but should be considered in developing guidelines for the empiric correction of refractive errors.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Natural history of infantile anisometropia.

AIMS/BACKGROUND: In a previous study longitudinal changes of anisometropia were investigated. It was shown that anisometropia arises and vanishes during the emmetropisation process and that the associated risk for amblyopia is low. The aim of this study was to follow acuity and refraction longitudinally in children with marked anisometropia at 1 year of age. METHODS: Refractive errors and visual acuity were estimated every sixth month for a selected group of 20 children with marked anisometropia > or = 3.0 D (spherical equivalent) at 1 year of age from approximately 3 to 10 years of age. RESULTS: The children could be classified into three groups. In six subjects the anisometropia increased (mean 1.4 D) and they all developed amblyopia. The remaining children could be classified into two groups of equal size. One group developed no amblyopia and the anisometropia decreased with a mean of 3.0 D. The seven remaining children developed amblyopia and/or strabismus; the mean anisometropia decrease was 1.2 D. CONCLUSION: Anisometropia at 1 year of age that is larger or equal to 3.0 D will in 90% of the cases still be there at 10 years of age. There is a substantial risk of this group developing amblyopia (60%).

Amblyopia↗
PubMed2005

Anisometropia is independently associated with both spherical and cylindrical ametropia.

PURPOSE: To explore the associations between anisometropia and spherical ametropia, astigmatism, age, and sex. METHOD: Associations between the prevalence and magnitude of anisometropia with age, sex, spherical power, and cylindrical power, were assessed in a group of 90,884 subjects attending optometry practices in the United Kingdom. Logistic regression models were used to assess the independent contribution of each explanatory variable. RESULTS: Logistic regression analyses that included all subjects or just those aged 20 to 40 years showed that spherical ametropia and astigmatism were independently associated with anisometropia (myopes, P < 1.0E-61; hyperopes, P < 1.0E-11). Anisometropia was relatively stable between the ages of 20 and 40 years, but then became more common with age, in myopes from the age of 40 years onward (P < 0.003) and in hyperopes from the age of 70 years onward (P < 1.0E-6). Sex was not associated with anisometropia to a clinically significant extent. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to show an independent association between anisometropia and both spherical ametropia and astigmatism. The results also suggest that the previously noted increased prevalence of anisometropia with age occurs later in hyperopes than in myopes, once other covariates have been controlled for. However, it could not be ruled out that this latter effect was due to clinical selection bias in our sample. The findings suggest that research projects involving the recruitment of highly ametropic subjects, such as those investigating the genetics of refractive error, may benefit by avoiding the use of stringent inclusion criteria for anisometropia, because otherwise a large proportion of the relevant population will be excluded.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Epidemiologic study of anisometropia in students of Natal, Brazil.

PURPOSE: To perform an epidemiologic study in students in Natal/Brazil, with relation to refractional anisometropia, evaluating criteria such as: gender, age, and association with strabismus and amblyopia. METHODS: A study of 1,024 students randomly selected from several districts of Natal/Brazil was undertaken by the Department of Ophthalmology of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), observing the following criteria of > or =2 spherical or cylindrical diopter refractional anisometropia relating it to sex, age, association with strabismus, amblyopia and anisometropia classification. RESULTS: We found a prevalence of 2% (N=21) anisometropia in the students. The female gender predominated with 81% (N=17). In students with anisometropia, we observed an association with strabismus in 9.5% of cases (N=2), both with exotropia. The association of anisometropia with amblyopia occurred in 47.6% of the cases (N=10), with 8 cases of unilateral amblyopia and 2 cases of bilateral amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: There was a predominance of anisometropia in females, and an increased prevalence of strabismus and amblyopia in students with anisometropia.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Screening for anisometropia in preschool children.

PURPOSE: A preschool vision screening program was reviewed to evaluate eccentric photoscreening (EP), visual acuity, and stereopsis in identifying anisometropia. METHODS: Patients referred by the screening were examined to assess efficacy of the three screening techniques in a population of preschool children. Testability and comparison of screening results to the classification of anisometropia (> or = 1 D) by retinoscopy obtained during a complete examination were evaluated. RESULTS: Although EP identified 94.5% of the anisometropic children as abnormal, only 27.8% were classified as anisometropic by EP. Of the anisometropic children, 36.1% failed acuity, but only 19.4% failed based on a 2 line or greater interocular acuity difference. Stereopsis correctly identified only 7.3% of anisometropes as abnormal. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of EP in identifying anisometropic children as abnormal was superior to acuity and stereopsis, yet its ability to identify anisometropia specifically was poor. Anisometropia of low magnitude or that masked by the dead zone of the EP system was frequently classified as isometropic. Altering the EP referral criterion and/or taking photographs through adequate power plus lenses may improve the sensitivity for specifically identifying anisometropia. However, caution must be exercised when using EP to examine the prevalence of anisometropia in a population or if used to screen for only amblyogenic refractive errors (i.e., anisometropia), because many anisometropes will be missed, resulting in inaccurate prevalence data and significant underreferrals.

Anisometropia↗
PubMed1999

Relationship between anisometropia, amblyopia, and binocularity.

PURPOSE: To determine if higher degrees of anisometropia cause deeper amblyopia and poorer binocularity than lower degrees of anisometropia in children and adults. METHODS: The clinical records for 60 patients with untreated anisometropic amblyopia without strabismus, ranging in age from 3 to 39 years, were reviewed. The refractive error, the initial best corrected visual acuities in the amblyopic and nonamblyopic eyes, and the level of binocularity were recorded from each chart. The degree of anisometropia was determined by: (1) calculating the difference between spherical equivalents for each eye; (2) calculating the difference in the vertical meridians for each eye; (3) calculating the difference in the horizontal meridians for each eye; and (4) calculating the root mean square difference which also takes into account differences in astigmatic axis. The depth of amblyopia was determined by converting the visual acuity score to its logarithmic value, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), and calculating the difference between the amblyopic and nonamblyopic eye. The level of binocularity was determined from stereopsis testing. RESULTS: For all patients, there was a significant relationship between the four measures of anisometropia, the depth of amblyopia, and the level of binocularity (median correlations 0.61 and 0.61, respectively). For the myopes (N = 10), there was no significant relationship between the 4 measures of anisometropia, the depth of amblyopia, and the level of binocularity (median correlations 0.34 and 0.61, respectively). For the hyperopes (N = 50), the relationship was significant for all 4 measures of anisometropia (median correlations 0.72 and 0.62, respectively). CONCLUSION: As the degree of anisometropia increases, the depth of amblyopia becomes greater and the level of binocularity becomes poorer, at least for hyperopic patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

Aniseikonia in relation to strabismus, anisometropia and amblyopia.

PURPOSE: To study the interrelationships among these four entities which are critical to binocular vision and its precision. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 102 selected patients (for their ability to have stereoscopic depth perception, a requisite for space eikonometry) were evaluated. Patient testing included stereoscopic testing, Essilor Projection Space Eikonometry, ultrasonic echographic axial length measurements and orthoptic evaluation. Aniseikonia was measured on the Essilor Projection Space Eikonometer. RESULTS: 1. Anisometropia alone was correlated with a marked increase in amblyopia, a moderate increase in aniseikonia and no noteworthy increase in strabismus. Statistical analysis (chi square ratio) showed that persons with elevated anisometropic values had a 4.4 fold increased risk of aniseikonia (p=.003). 2. Aniseikonia alone was not responsible for marked variations in strabismus. 3. Amblyopia was correlated with increases in anisometropia and aniseikonia. 4. Adding aniseikonia to anisometropia produced a possible increase in strabismus and a great increase in amblyopia (using Fisher's Exact Test, 2-tailed). 5. Spearman correlations of the "absolute values" (the mean of the mathematical difference between the two eyes of anisometropia and amblyopia) were as follows: anisometropia (abs) vs. aniseikonia r=.294, p=.006; anisometropia (abs) vs. amblyopia (abs) 4=.555, p=<.001; amblyopia (abs) vs. aniseikonia r=.234, p=.02. CONCLUSIONS: Aniseikonia per se does not appear to have a major causal role in amblyopia or strabismus, but anisometropia does for amblyopia. This role is greatly augmented by aniseikonia and this combination may then produce strabismus.

Amblyopia↗
PubMed2004

Ocular anisometropia and laterality.

PURPOSE: To study the difference in refraction between right and left eyes (anisometropia) in different age groups, look for evidence of eye laterality (more refractive error in one eye) and compare the size of anisometropia in the myopic and emmetropic ranges. METHODS: The study was based on children in Hong Kong (examined at the age of 6 years and again at the age of 8.5 years) and their parents (aged 26-60 years). RESULTS: In all age groups the difference between right and left eyes in sphere and cylinder was modest, in most cases < or = 0.25 D. In both children and their parents a tendency towards spherical right eye laterality was found in the myopic individuals (p < 0.05). This was not the case with the cylinder. In the 8.5-year-old children and in their parents, the numerical size of spherical anisometropia increased with myopia (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). Cylindrical anisometropia did not exhibit such an increase. CONCLUSION: In Hong Kong children and their parents we found a tendency towards more spherical myopia in right eyes (laterality) in myopic cases. The numerical size of spherical anisometropia also increased in myopia in these groups. Cylindrical anisometropia appeared to be independent of spherical ametropia. In most cases right/left differences in both sphere and cylinder were small and our findings justify the use of data from one eye only in publications on refraction.

Adult↗