Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2017, Article ID 3684971, 11 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3684971
Research Article

Age-Related Variations of Rabbit Corneal Geometrical and Clinical Biomechanical Parameters

1School of Biomedical Engineering, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China
2Beijing Key Laboratory of Fundamental Research on Biomechanics in Clinical Application, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Lin Li; nc.ude.umcc@lil

Received 29 March 2017; Revised 23 May 2017; Accepted 27 June 2017; Published 13 August 2017

Academic Editor: Ilias Georgalas

Copyright © 2017 Haixia Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. Shah, M. Laiquzzaman, I. Yeung, X. Pan, and C. Roberts, “The use of the ocular response analyser to determine corneal hysteresis in eyes before and after excimer laser refractive surgery,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 123–128, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. D. Viswanathan, N. L. Kumar, J. J. Males, and S. L. Graham, “Relationship of structural characteristics to biomechanical profile in normal, keratoconic, and crosslinked eyes,” Cornea, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 791–796, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Elsheikh, D. Wang, M. Brown, P. Rama, M. Campanelli, and D. Pye, “Assessment of corneal biomechanical properties and their variation with age,” Current Eye Research, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 11–19, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. X. Wang, W. Chen, C. Liu, Y. Li, and L. Ma, “Effects of aging on biomechanics properties in rabbit eyes,” in Proceedings of the 2009 2nd International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Informatics, BMEI 2009, pp. 1–3, IEEE, China, October 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. H. Zhang, L. Li, and X. Qian, “Age-related changes in biomechanical properties of rabbit corneas,” Journal of Medical Biomechanics, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 271–276, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  6. W. Chen, X. Wang, and C. liu, “Experimental study on the biomechanical properties of rabbit eyeball,” in Proceedings of the Ninth National Symposium on Biomechanics, 2009.
  7. Y. Nakao, Y. Kiuchi, S. Okimoto, and S. Bhattacharya, “A comparison of the corrected intraocular pressure obtained by the corvis ST and reichert 7CR tonometers in glaucoma patients,” PLOS ONE, vol. 12, no. 1, e0170206 pages, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. D. A. Luce, “Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 156–162, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. S. Shah, M. Laiquzzaman, I. Cunliffe, and S. Mantry, “The use of the Reichert ocular response analyser to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes,” Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 257–262, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. A. K. C. Lam, D. Chen, and J. Tse, “The usefulness of waveform score from the ocular response analyzer,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 195–199, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. Vantomme, S. Pourjavan, and M. Detry-Morel, “The range of the waveform score of the ocular response analyzer (ora) in healthy subjects.,” Bulletin de la Société belge d'ophtalmologie, no. 322, pp. 91–97, 2013. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. D. Touboul, A. Bénard, A. M. Mahmoud, A. Gallois, J. Colin, and C. J. Roberts, “Early biomechanical keratoconus pattern measured with an ocular response analyzer: curve analysis,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2144–2150, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. K. M. Hallahan, A. Sinha Roy, R. Ambrosio Jr., M. Salomao, and W. J. Dupps Jr., “Discriminant value of custom ocular response analyzer waveform derivatives in keratoconus,” Ophthalmology, vol. 121, no. 2, pp. 459–468, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. Zarei-Ghanavati, A. Ramirez-Miranda, F. Yu, and D. R. Hamilton, “Corneal deformation signal waveform analysis in keratoconic versus post-femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis eyes after statistical correction for potentially confounding factors,” Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 607–614, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. S. Wolffsohn, S. Safeen, S. Shah, and M. Laiquzzaman, “Changes of corneal biomechanics with keratoconus,” Cornea, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 849–854, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. G. Jóhannesson, P. Hallberg, K. Ambarki, A. Eklund, and C. Lindén, “Age-dependency of ocular parameters: a cross sectional study of young and elderly healthy subjects,” Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, vol. 253, no. 11, pp. 1979–1983, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. E. Şen, K. U. Elgin, P. Yüksekkaya et al., “Age-related changes in biomechanical parameters of the cornea and intraocular pressure in a healthy Turkish population,” Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 687–690, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. F. Sharifipour, M. Panahi-bazaz, R. Bidar, A. Idani, and B. Cheraghian, “Age-related variations in corneal biomechanical properties,” Journal of Current Ophthalmology, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 117–122, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. K. Kamiya, K. Shimizu, and F. Ohmoto, “Effect of aging on corneal biomechanical parameters using the ocular response analyzer,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 888–893, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. E. Strobbe, M. Cellini, U. Barbaresi, and E. C. Campos, “Influence of age and gender on corneal biomechanical properties in a healthy Italian population,” Cornea, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 968–972, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. A. Kotecha, A. Elsheikh, C. R. Roberts, H. Zhu, and D. F. Garway-Heath, “Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 5337–5347, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. X. Song, A. Langenbucher, Z. Gatzioufas, B. Seitz, and M. El-Husseiny, “Effect of biometric characteristics on the change of biomechanical properties of the human cornea due to cataract surgery,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2014, Article ID 628019, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. S. Bak-Nielsen, I. B. Pedersen, A. Ivarsen, and J. Hjortdal, “Repeatability, reproducibility, and age dependency of dynamic Scheimpflug-based pneumotonometer and its correlation with a dynamic bidirectional pneumotonometry device,” Cornea, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 71–77, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. S. G. Çevik, S. A. Kivanç, B. Akova-Budak, and M. Tok-Çevik, “Relationship among corneal biomechanics, anterior segment parameters, and geometric corneal parameters,” Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 2016, Article ID 8418613, 7 pages, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. S. Franco and M. Lira, “Biomechanical properties of the cornea measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer and their association with intraocular pressure and the central corneal curvature,” Clinical and Experimental Optometry, vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 469–475, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. H. S. Hwang, S. K. Park, and M. S. Kim, “The biomechanical properties of the cornea and anterior segment parameters,” BMC Ophthalmology, vol. 13, article 49, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. M. R. Sedaghat, M. Sharepoor, S. Hassanzadeh, and M. Abrishami, “The corneal volume and biomechanical corneal factors: is there any orrelation?” Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 32–39, 2012. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. Y. Hon, G. Chen, S. Lu, D. C. Lam, and A. K. Lam, “High myopes have lower normalised corneal tangent moduli (less ‘stiff’ corneas) than low myopes,” Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 42–50, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. M. Mikielewicz, K. Kotliar, R. I. Barraquer, and R. Michael, “Air-pulse corneal applanation signal curve parameters for the characterisation of keratoconus,” British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 95, no. 6, pp. 793–798, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. K. S. Lim, S. S. Wickremasinghe, M. F. Cordeiro, C. Bunce, and P. T. Khaw, “Accuracy of intraocular pressure measurements in New Zealand white rabbits,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 2419–2423, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. H. Zhang, D. Yang, C. M. Ross, J. P. Wigg, S. Pandav, and J. G. Crowston, “Validation of rebound tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement in the rabbit,” Experimental Eye Research, vol. 121, pp. 86–93, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. X. Wang, X. Li, W. Chen, R. He, Z. Gao, and P. Feng, “Effects of ablation depth and repair time on the corneal elastic modulus after laser in situ keratomileusis,” BioMedical Engineering OnLine, vol. 16, no. 1, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  33. B. K. Armstrong, M. P. Lin, M. R. Ford et al., “Biological and biomechanical responses to traditional epithelium-off and transepithelial ribofl avin-UVA CXL techniques in rabbits,” Journal of Refractive Surgery, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 332–341, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. Liu and X. Zhu, Laboratory Animal Science, Anhui University Press, 2012.
  35. W. J. O'Brien and J. L. Taylor, “Therapeutic response of herpes simplex virus-induced corneal edema to trifluridine in combination with immunosuppressive agents,” Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 2455–2461, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  36. C. Kirwan, M. O'keefe, and B. Lanigan, “Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert ocular response analyzer,” American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 142, no. 6, pp. 990–992, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. B. Wang, Z. Zhang, R. K. Naidu et al., “Comparison of the change in posterior corneal elevation and corneal biomechanical parameters after small incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for high myopia correction,” Contact Lens & Anterior Eye, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 191–196, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. I. Bueno-Gimeno, E. España-Gregori, A. Gene-Sampedro, A. Lanzagorta-Aresti, and D. P. Piñero-Llorens, “Relationship among corneal biomechanics, refractive error, and axial length,” Optometry and Vision Science, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 507–513, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. G. Mangouritsas, G. Morphis, S. Mourtzoukos, and E. Feretis, “Association between corneal hysteresis and central corneal thickness in glaucomatous and non-glaucomatous eyes,” Acta Ophthalmologica, vol. 87, no. 8, pp. 901–905, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. N. Rosa, M. Lanza, M. De Bernardo, G. Signoriello, and P. Chiodini, “Relationship between corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor with other ocular parameters,” Seminars in Ophthalmology, vol. 30, no. 5-6, pp. 335–339, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. P. L. Dabasia, B. R. Fidalgo, D. F. Edgar, D. F. Garway-Heath, and J. G. Lawrenson, “Diagnostic accuracy of technologies for glaucoma case-finding in a community setting,” Ophthalmology, vol. 122, no. 12, pp. 2407–2415, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. P. Tsikripis, D. Papaconstantinou, C. Koutsandrea, M. Apostolopoulos, and I. Georgalas, “The effect of prostaglandin analogs on the biomechanical properties and central thickness of the cornea of patients with open-angle glaucoma: a 3-year study on 108 eyes,” Drug Design, Development and Therapy, vol. 7, pp. 1149–1156, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. A. K. C. Lam and J. S. H. Tse, “Dynamic contour tonometry over silicone hydrogel contact lens,” Journal of Optometry, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 91–99, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus