In keeping with the findings of Drexler et al.,
13 we observed a transient elongation in axial length during the accommodation response. In contrast to Drexler et al. the greatest elongation was seen in myopic eyes, with emmetropic eyes elongating significantly less at higher levels of accommodative demand. We concur with the assertion of Drexler et al. that this transient elongation may be due to the effect of contraction of ciliary smooth muscle applying an inward pull force to a region of the choroid and sclera adjacent to the ciliary body. This effect requires a rearward displacement of the posterior portion of the globe to maintain a constant ocular volume, which results in a transient increase in axial length. Recently, Yasuda and Yamaguchi
17 have shown that contraction of ciliary smooth muscle induced by pilocarpine can cause a steepening of the central area of the cornea, indicating potential for transient biometric change of the eye during the near vision response. We suggest that the greater elongation observed in myopic eyes in our study may be due to reduced ocular rigidity and a more efficient transmission of ciliary muscle force to the choroid and sclera in these subjects. We note, however, the work of Schmid et al.,
18 who found no difference in ocular rigidity between emmetropic and myopic children. Ocular rigidity is a worthy subject for further investigation, particularly in young adult emmetropes who may be at risk of the development of late-onset myopia due to occupational near vision demands.
The subject cohort used in our study were younger and had a higher amplitude of accommodation than did the cohort used by Drexler et al.,
13 which may have influence on the results. Our emmetropic and myopic groups were closely matched for amplitude of accommodation. Furthermore, accommodation stimulus levels used in our study were equivalent in all subjects in both refractive groups (i.e., 2, 4, and 6 D above baseline), rather than the maximum accommodative effort at the near point. Because the accommodation of the myopic subjects in Drexler et al.
13 was stimulated to a lesser extent than the accommodation of the emmetropes (mean values of 4.1 D for myopes and 5.1 D for emmetropes), it may be that the transient axial elongation of the myopic subjects was underestimated slightly. The accommodative stimulus levels selected in the experiment presented in the current report were within the achievable accommodative range of all subjects, thus avoiding potential ceiling effects that may occur (e.g., an open-loop response) if the stimulus exceeds the available amplitude of accommodation.
The work presented herein has also shown that the degree of transient axial elongation correlates well with the level of accommodative stimulation, as shown by Drexler et al.
13 in emmetropes. The amount of transient axial length elongation increased systematically as the stimulus to accommodation was increased. Further, we can state that this effect also occurs in the myopic eye, and indeed this effect was more pronounced in these subjects. A statistically significant correlation was not found between baseline axial length and transient elongation, or between SER and transient elongation. The fact that a significant difference in elongation was detected at 6 D accommodative stimulus supports the notion that there is an inherent difference in the structural makeup of the myopic eye and that myopic eyes are more amenable to transient biometric change during high levels of accommodation than are their emmetropic counterparts.
Because the difference in axial length elongation was not observed until higher levels of accommodative stimulation, outside the normal range for tasks such as reading or visual display unit use, it seems unlikely that this effect plays a significant role in the development of myopia in adults. This effect could play a role in the refractive development of children as their reading distance is generally closer than that of adults. The COMET study has shown that progressive-addition spectacle lenses may be more beneficial in slowing the progression of myopia in children adopting closer reading distances.
19 Hyperopic defocus occurring as a result of lag of accommodation during near vision has been shown to be a potential factor in myopia.
20 Transient axial elongation during sustained accommodative effort may actually reduce the degree of hyperopic blur occurring due to accommodative lag by a small amount—this effect being greater in myopes than in emmetropes, but probably not of clinical significance. These findings do, however, indicate that there may be differences in the structure of the eye in the region of the ciliary body between emmetropes and myopes, causing forces from the ciliary muscle to be transmitted differentially to the choroid and sclera in these two refractive groups. Further investigations should now take place to measure the axial expandability of the eyes of premyopic children during the accommodation response. It may be that ocular expandability serves as a precursor to and therefore a predictor of the onset of myopia. This information would be most useful in the development of therapeutic approaches to the control of myopia onset and progression and in the selection of suitable subjects for clinical trials of myopia control programs.
In our study, we saw greater levels of transient axial elongation than those noted by Drexler et al.
13 Our results are comparable to those of Uozato et al. (
IOVS 2003;44:ARVO E-Abstract 4080), who found transient accommodation-induced elongations of ∼0.06 mm with a stimulus level of 10 D, again using the IOLMaster. To calculate axial length from the optical path length, the IOLMaster uses an average refractive index for the eye, and therefore may be susceptible to an overestimation of up to 0.02 mm in axial length for an eye accommodating to a 10-D stimulus when compared with PCI methods that use individual refractive indices for the ocular components. Atchison and Smith
21 have shown that the action of accommodation may induce errors in the measurement of axial length obtained from the IOLMaster. The source of this potential error is the increase in optical path length (i.e., the product of the linear dimension of a given optical medium and the refractive index of that medium) that occurs when the anterior vertex of the crystalline lens moves forward into the anterior chamber and crystalline lens thickness increases during the accommodation response. During this response, the higher refractive index material of the anterior portion of the crystalline lens (
n′ = 1.386) displaces a portion of the lower refractive index aqueous humor (
n′ = 1.336), leading to an increase in optical path length. In our experiment, the level of reduction in anterior chamber depth during the accommodation response was found to be in agreement with previous studies,
22 but was not significantly different between emmetropic and myopic subjects. Because the refractive index of aqueous humor and crystalline lens are likely to be equivalent between emmetropes and myopes of similar age,
23 we are confident that the statistical significance of the difference in axial elongation noted during the accommodation response between these refractive groups is not an artifact of the measurement technique. We therefore conclude that, although the axial elongation resulting from the accommodation response may be exaggerated by the IOLMaster, the eyes of myopic individuals undergo a greater degree of transient axial elongation than do the eyes of emmetropes at higher levels of accommodative demand.