4.1 Article

Effects of Mydriatics on Rod/Cone- and Melanopsin-driven Pupil Responses

期刊

OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE
卷 97, 期 3, 页码 198-206

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001486

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [NIH P30 EY007551]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE The purposes of this study were to compare the effects of atropine, a muscarinic antagonist, and phenylephrine, an adrenergic agonist, on consensual pupil responses and to assess the repeatability of pupil metrics without mydriasis. METHODS Right eye pupil responses of 20 adults aged 21 to 42 years were recorded before and 45 minutes after instillation of 0.5% atropine or 2.5% phenylephrine in the left eye. Stimuli were presented to the left eye and included six alternating 1-second 651-nm red and 456-nm blue flashes. Metrics included baseline pupil diameter, maximal constriction, 6- and 30-second post-illumination pupil responses, and early (0 to 10 seconds) and late (10 to 30 seconds) areas under the curve. RESULTS Dilation of the stimulated eye with either mydriatic significantly increased the 6-second post-illumination pupil response and early and late areas under the curve for blue stimuli, and early area under the curve for red stimuli (P < .05 for all). Melanopsin-driven post-illumination pupil responses, achieved with either phenylephrine or atropine, did not significantly differ from each other (P > .05 for all). Without mydriasis, intersession intraclass correlation coefficients for pupil metrics were 0.63 and 0.50 (6- and 30-second post-illumination pupil responses, respectively) and 0.78 and 0.44 (early and late areas under the curve, respectively) for blue stimuli, with no significant difference between sessions (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS Dilation with phenylephrine or atropine resulted in similar enhancements of the rod/cone- and melanopsin-driven pupil responses, despite differing mechanisms. Early pupil metrics without mydriasis demonstrated moderate to good intersession repeatability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据