Principles of Presbyopia Treatment
Keywords:
presbyopia, monovision, multifocality, accommodationAbstract
Abstract
Presbyopia is a physiological insufficiency of accommodation associated with the aging of the eye
which results in progressively worsening of ability to focus clearly on close objects. The condition is
commonly found in people age 40 years or older. The goal of amblyopia treatment is to enable the patient
to see clearly at close range. Principles of treatment include monovision, multifocality and restoration
of accommodation. The equipment used include spectacles, contact lenses, drugs or surgeries. The
advantages and disadvantages of each treatment option are discussed.
References
Kleinstein RN. Epidemiology of presbyopia. In: Stark L, Obrecht G, eds. Presbyopia. New York: Professional Press;1987:14-5.
Fricke TR., Tahhan N., Resnikoff S., Papas E., Burnett A., Ho S.M., et al. Global Prevalence of Presbyopia and Vision Impairment from Uncorrected Presbyopia:
Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Modeling. Ophthalmology 2018;125(10):1492-9.
Southall JPC, ed. Helmholtz’s Treatise on Physiological Optics. Translated from the 3rd German ed. New York: Dover Publications;1962.
Charman WN. The eye in focus: Accommodation and presbyopia. Clin Exp Optom 2008;91:207-25.
Schachar RA. Cause and treatment of presbyopia with a method for increasing the amplitude of accommodation. Ann Ophthalmol 1992;24(12):445–7, 452.
Schachar RA. Theoretical basis for the scleral expansion band procedure for surgical reversal of presbyopia. Compr Ther 2001;27:39-46.
Glasser A, KaufmanPL. The mechanism of accommodation in primates. Ophthalmology 1999;106(5):863–72.
Strenk SA, StrenkLM, Koretz JF. The mechanism of presbyopia. Prog Retin Eye Res 2005;24(3):379–93.
Strenk SA, Strenk LM, Guo S. Magnetic resonance imaging of the anteroposterior position and thickness of the aging, accommodating, phakic, and pseudophakic ciliary muscle. J Cataract Refract Surg 2010;36:235–41.
McGill E, Erickson P. Stereopsis in presbyopes wearing monovision and simultaneous vision bifocal contact lenses. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988; 65:619-26
Collins M, Goode A, Brown B. Distance visual acuity and monovision. Optom Vis Sci 1993;70:723-8.
Josephson JE, Caffery BE. Monovision vs. bifocal contact lenses: crossover study. J Am Optom Assoc 1987;58:652-4.
Bennett ES. Remba MJ, Weissman BA. Contact lenses and the elderly patient. In: Rosenbloom AA, Morgan MW, eds. Vision and aging, 2nd ed. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann;1993:251- 89.
Farid M, Steinert RF. Patient selection for monovision laser refractive surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2009;20:251-4.
Davidson RS, Dhaliwal D, Hamilton DR, Jackson M, Patterson L, Stonecipher K, et al. Surgical correction of presbyopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 2016;42:920-30.
Cox CA, Krueger RR. Monovision with laser vision correction. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2006;19:71-5.
Greenstein S, Pineda R 2nd. The quest for spectacle independence: A comparison of multifocal intraocular lens implants and pseudophakic monovision for
patients with presbyopia. Semin Ophthalmol 2017;32:111-5
Gil-Cazorla R, Shah S, Naroo SA. A review of the surgical options for the correction of presbyopia. Br J Ophthalmol 2016;100:62-70.
Kelava L, Barić H, Bušić M, Čima I, Trkulja V. Monovision versus multifocality for presbyopia: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized
controlled trials. Adv Ther 2017;34:1815–39.
Ito M, Shimizu K, Iida Y, Amano R. Five-year clinical study of patients with pseudophakic monovision. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012;38:1440-5.
Finkelman YM, Ng JQ, Barrett GD. Patient satisfaction and visual function after pseudophakic monovision. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009;35:998-1002.
Zhang F, Sugar A, Arbisser L, Jacobsen G, Artico J. Crossed versus conventional pseudophakic monovision: Patient satisfaction, visual function, and spectacle independence. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015;41:1845-54.
Evans BJ. Monovision: a review. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2007;27:417-39.
Jain S, Arora I, Azar DT. Success of monovision in presbyopes: Review of the literature and potential applications to refractive surgery. Surv Ophthalmol
;40:491-9.
Donders FC. On the anomalies of accommodation and refraction of the eye. London: The New Sydenham Society;1864:204-14.
Duane A. Normal values of the accommodation at all ages. JAMA 1912; 59:1010-3.
Turner MJ. Observations on the normal subjective amplitude of accommodation. Br J Physiol Opt 1958;15(2):70-100.
Hofstetter HW. Useful age-amplitude formula. Optom World 1950;38:42-5.
Liu JP, Zhang F, Zhao JY, Ma LW, Zhang JS. Visual function and higher order aberration after implantation of aspheric and spherical multifocal intraocular lenses: A meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol 2013;6:690–5.
Blaylock JF, Si Z, Vickers C. Visual and refractive status at different focal distances after implantation of the ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract
Refract Surg 2006;32(9):1464–73.
Schmitz S, Dick HB, Krummenauer F, Schwenn O, Krist R. Contrast sensitivity and glare disability by halogen light after monofocal and multifocal lens
implantation. Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84(10):1109–12.
Montés-Micó R, España E, Bueno I, Charman WN, Menezo JL. Visual performance with multifocal intraocular lenses: mesopic contrast sensitivity under distance
and near conditions. Ophthalmology 2004;111(1):85–96.
Vega F, Alba-Bueno F, Millán MS. Energy distribution between distance and near images in apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses. Invest
Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52(8):5695–701.
Kasper T, Bühren J, Kohnen T. Visual performance of aspherical and spherical intraocular lenses: intraindividual comparison of visual acuity, contrast
sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006;32(12):2022–9.
Pallikaris IG. Presbyopia surgery introduction. In: Pallikaris IG, Plainis S, Charman WN, eds. Presbyopia: origins, effects, and treatment. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK
Incorporated; 2012:141-2.
Malecaze FJ, Gazagne CS, Tarroux MC, Gorrand JM. Scleral expansion bands for presbyopia. Ophthalmology 2001;108:2165–71.
Malecaze FJ, Soler V, Guillard C. Scleral expansion bands. In: Pallikaris IG, Plainis S, Charman WN, eds. Presbyopia: origins, effects, and treatment. Thorofare,
NJ: SLACK Incorporated; 2012:213–7.
Hipsley A, Hall B, Rocha KM. Scleral surgery for the treatment of presbyopia: Where are we today? Eye and Vis 2018;5:4.
Balgos MJ, Vargas V, Alió JL. Correction of presbyopia: An integrated update for the practical surgeon. Taiwan J Ophthalmol 2018;8:121-40.
Myers RI, Krueger RR. Novel approaches to correction of presbyopia with laser modification of the crystalline lens. J Refract Surg 1998;14:136–9.
Krueger RR, Kuszak J, Lubatschowski H, Myers RI, Ripken T, Heisterkamp A. First safety study of femtosecond laser photodisruption in animal lenses:
Tissue morphology and cataractogenesis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:2386–94.
Schumacher S, Oberheide U, Fromm M, Ripken T, Ertmer W, Gerten G, et al. Femtosecond laser induced flexibility change of human donor lenses.
Vision Res 2009;49(14):1853-9.
Ackerman R, Kunert K, Kammel R, Bischoff S, Bühren SC, Schubert H, et al. Femtosecond laser treatment of the crystalline lens: a 1-year study of possible
cataractogenesis in minipigs. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2011;249(10):1567-73.
Langenbucher A, Huber S, Nguyen NX, Seitz B, Gusek-Schneider GC, Küchle M. Measurement of accommodation after implantation of an
accommodating posterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:677-85.
McLeod SD. Optical principles, biomechanics, and initial clinical performance of a dual-optic accommodating intraocular lens (an American
ophthalmological society thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 2006;104:437-52.
Findl O, Leydolt C. Meta-analysis of accommodating intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2007;33:522-7.
Menapace R, Findl O, Kriechbaum K, Leydolt-Koeppl C. Accommodating intraocular lenses: a critical review of present and future concepts. Graefes Arch
Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2007;245:473–89.
Sheppard AL, Bashir A, Wolffsohn JS, Davies LN. Accommodating intraocular lenses: a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods. Clin Exp
Optom 2010;93:441-52.
All Answers. Restoring Dynamic Accommodation via Accommodative Intraocular Lenses. November 2018 (available from:URL: https://www.ukdiss.com/
examples/restoring-dynamic-accommodation-viaaccommodative-intraocular-lenses.php?vref=1) Accessed March 11,2020.
Wolffsohn JS, Davies LN. Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies. Prog Retin Eye Res 2019;68:124-43.
Benozzi J, Benozzi G, Orman B. Presbyopia: a new potential pharmacological treatment. Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol 2012;1:3–5.
Crawford KS, Garner WH, Burns W. Dioptin™: a novel pharmaceutical formulation for restoration of accommodation in presbyopes. Invest Ophthalmol
Vis Sci 2014;55(13):3765.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Thai Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is a peer-reviewed, scientific journal published biannually for the Royal College of Ophthalmologists of Thailand. The objectives of the journal is to provide up to date scientific knowledge in the field of ophthalmology, provide ophthalmologists with continuing education, promote cooperation, and sharing of opinion among readers.
The copyright of the published article belongs to the Thai Journal of Ophthalmology. However the content, ideas and the opinions in the article are from the author(s). The editorial board does not have to agree with the authors’ ideas and opinions.
The authors or readers may contact the editorial board via email at admin@rcopt.org.
