Effects of short-term exposure to red or near-infrared light on axial length in young human subjects.

PURPOSE: To determine whether visible light is needed to elicit axial eye shortening by exposure to long wavelength light. METHODS: Incoherent narrow-band red (620 ± 10 nm) or near-infrared (NIR, 875 ± 30 nm) light was generated by an array of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and projected monocularly in 17 myopic and 13 non-myopic subjects for 10 min. The fellow eye was occluded. Light sources were positioned 50 cm from the eye in a dark room. Axial length (AL) was measured before and after the exposure using low-coherence interferometry. RESULTS: Non-myopic subjects responded to red light with significant eye shortening, while NIR light induced minor axial elongation (-13.3 ± 17.3 µm vs. +6.5 ± 11.6 µm, respectively, p = 0.005). Only 41% of the myopic subjects responded to red light exposure with a decrease in AL and changes were therefore, on average, not significantly different from those observed with NIR light (+0.2 ± 12.1 µm vs. +1.1 ± 11.2 µm, respectively, p = 0.83). Interestingly, there was a significant correlation between refractive error and induced changes in AL after exposure to NIR light in myopic eyes (r(15) = -0.52, p = 0.03) and induced changes in AL after exposure to red light in non-myopic eyes (r(11) = 0.62, p = 0.02), with more induced axial elongation with increasing refractive error. CONCLUSIONS: Incoherent narrow-band red light at 620 nm induced axial shortening in 77% of non-myopic and 41% of myopic eyes. NIR light did not induce any significant changes in AL in either refractive group, suggesting that the beneficial effect of red laser light therapy on myopia progression requires visible stimulation and not simply thermal energy.

Changing accommodation behaviour during multifocal soft contact lens wear using auditory biofeedback training.

Biofeedback training has been used to access autonomically-controlled body functions through visual or acoustic signals to manage conditions like anxiety and hyperactivity. Here we examined the use of auditory biofeedback to improve accommodative responses to near visual stimuli in patients wearing single vision (SV) and multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCL). MFCLs are one evidence-based treatment shown to be effective in slowing myopia progression in children. However, previous research found that the positive addition relaxed accommodation at near, possibly reducing the therapeutic benefit. Accommodation accuracy was examined in 18 emmetropes and 19 myopes while wearing SVCLs and MFCLs (centre-distance). Short periods of auditory biofeedback training to improve the response (reduce the lag of accommodation) was performed and accommodation re-assessed while patients wore the SVCLs and MFCLs. Significantly larger accommodative lags were measured with MFCLs compared to SV. Biofeedback training effectively reduced the lag by ≥0.3D in individuals of both groups with SVCL and MFCL wear. The training was more effective in myopes wearing their habitual SVCLs. This study shows that accommodation can be changed with short biofeedback training independent of the refractive state. With this proof-of-concept, we hypothesize that biofeedback training in myopic children wearing MFCLs might improve the treatment effectiveness.

Changes in dopamine and ZENK during suppression of myopia in chicks by intense illuminance.

High ambient illuminances have been found to slow the development of deprivation myopia in several animal models. Almost complete inhibition of myopia was observed in chickens when intermittent episodes of high illuminance were alternated with standard office illuminance (50% duty cycle, alternate periods of 1 min 15,000 lux and 1 min 500 lux, continued for 10 h per day), or when illuminances were increased to 40,000 lux. Since the mechanisms by which bright light suppresses myopia are poorly understood, we have studied the roles of two well-established signaling molecules in myopia, dopamine and ZENK, in the chicken. In line with previous studies, we found that retinal dopamine release (as reflected by vitreal DOPAC content) was severely reduced during development of deprivation myopia. We found that illuminance of 15,000 lux, provided by quartz-halogen lamps, partially rescued the drop in retinal dopamine release. The finding is in line with the assumption that dopamine is involved in the light-induced inhibition of myopia. No differences in vitreal DOPAC were found when bright light was provided continuously or with 1:1 min alternating exposure with 500 lux. As previously described by others, wearing diffusers suppressed the expression of ZENK protein in glucagonergic amacrine cells (GACs) but neither continuous nor 1:1 min alternating bright to normal light could rescue the suppression of ZENK in GACs. While it is well known that light increases global retinal ZENK mRNA and protein levels, the changes of ZENK protein induced specifically in GACs by diffuser wear appear independent of light levels.

Effects of unilateral topical atropine on binocular pupil responses and eye growth in mice.

PURPOSE: Studies on drugs selected to target myopia development often use the vehicle-treated fellow eye as a control. However, it is not clear how much of the drug reaches the fellow eye, rendering it a potentially invalid control. Therefore, in this study, pupil responses were used to probe the effects of atropine in both eyes in mice, after unilateral topical application. In a second experiment, interocular differences in refractive development and axial eye growth were studied while atropine was applied daily to one eye. METHODS: In 20 C57BL/6 (B6) wildtype mice, a single drop of 1% atropine solution was instilled into one eye. Mice were gently restrained by holding their necks while video image processing software detected the pupil and measured its diameter at a sampling rate of 30 Hz. A bright green LED, attached to the photoretinoscope of the video camera, was flashed. Pupil responses were quantified daily over a period of 2 weeks. In another group of 24 mice, one drop of 1% atropine was applied daily for 28 days. Axial length was measured pre- and post-treatment, using low coherence interferometry (the Zeiss AC-Master). Refractive development was measured by infrared photorefraction. RESULTS: Similar to previous findings with the same device, untreated eyes displayed a pupil constriction of 24.84+/-1.73% upon stimulation with the green LED. A single drop of 1% atropine caused complete suppression with no significant recovery over the whole observation period of two weeks. The responses in the fellow eye were temporarily reduced to about 75% and then recovered towards baseline. After daily atropine application, there was significant reduction in axial length of the eyes, relative to the saline-treated fellow eyes (3.234+/-0.186 versus 3.378+/-0.176 mm, n=24, p<0.01, paired t-test) and the refractions became more hyperopic/less myopic (+13.46+/-2.15 D versus +10.06+/-2.02 D, n=24, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous findings, one drop of atropine solution caused a long lasting suppression of pupil responses in the mouse eye. New data show that the transfer to the fellow eye was limited, making interocular comparisons feasible. It is also new that topical atropine reduced axial eye growth even when mice had largely normal vision.