4.4 Article

Refractive properties of the healthy human eye during acute hyperglycemia

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-008-0810-y

Keywords

hyperglycemia; diabetes mellitus; Scheimpflug imaging; Hartmann-Shack aberrometry; refractive errors; lens

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To measure the refractive properties of the healthy human eye during acute hyperglycemia by means of Scheimpflug imaging and Hartmann-Shack aberrometry. Methods Acute hyperglycemia was induced in five healthy subjects (two males, three females, mean age +/- SD 24.8 years +/- 4.6) by means of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) after subcutaneous somatostatin injection. Before and every 30 minutes after the OGTT, measurements with Scheimpflug imaging and Hartmann-Shack aberrometry were performed. The main outcome measures were the thickness and shape of the lens, and the ocular refractive error and higher order aberrations. The equivalent refractive index of the lens was calculated from these parameters. Measurements at baseline and during hyperglycemia were analyzed by means of Wilcoxon signed rank sum tests. Results During hyperglycemia (mean blood glucose level at baseline: 4.0 mmol/l; mean maximal blood glucose level: 18.4 mmol/l) no changes could be found in the refractive properties within the group. In one subject, a hyperopic shift (0.4 D) was observed, together with a more convex shape of the anterior lens surface and a decrease in the equivalent refractive index of the lens. Conclusions This study shows that hyperglycemia generally does not cause changes in the refractive properties of the healthy eye. Nevertheless, in one subject a hyperopic shift accompanied by a change in shape and refractive index of the lens was measured. This finding could provide an explanation for the mechanism underlying the refractive changes that are often observed during hyperglycemia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available