December 2002
Volume 43, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2002
Assessment of the Strength of the Lens Capsule Following Capsulorhexis
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • NM Ziebarth
    Ophthalmic Biophysics Center Bascom Palmer Eye Institute Miami FL
  • V Fernandez
    Ophthalmic Biophysics Center Bascom Palmer Eye Institute Miami FL
  • D Denham
    Ophthalmic Biophysics Center Bascom Palmer Eye Institute Miami FL
  • P Lamar
    Ophthalmic Biophysics Center Bascom Palmer Eye Institute Miami FL
  • A Ho
    Crcert University of New South Wales Melbourne Australia
  • P Erickson
    Crcert University of New South Wales Melbourne Australia
  • J-M Parel
    Ophthalmic Biophysics Center Bascom Palmer Eye Institute Miami FL
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   N.M. Ziebarth, None; V. Fernandez, None; D. Denham, None; P. Lamar, None; A. Ho, None; P. Erickson, None; J. Parel, None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 2002, Vol.43, 408. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      NM Ziebarth, V Fernandez, D Denham, P Lamar, A Ho, P Erickson, J-M Parel; Assessment of the Strength of the Lens Capsule Following Capsulorhexis . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):408.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To measure the strength of the lens capsule after capsulorhexis. Methods: Capsulorhexis measuring 1 to 3mm in diameter were made in either the central or peripheral region of 30 Eye Bank and 32 rabbit eyes. A specialized instrument was built in order to stretch the capsulorhexis at a constant rate. The capsulorhexis was stretched until rupture, as the applied load (in grams) was recorded by a data acquisition program. The applied load as a function of displacement was found for each experiment. From this, the maximum strain was calculated. Results: The average value for the load for eye bank eyes was 26±20mN for central and 53±21mN for peripheral capsulorhexis. The average value for the strain for eye bank eyes was 50±18% for central and 63±17% for peripheral capsulorhexis. The average value for the load for rabbit eyes was 20±15mN for central and 14±9mN for peripheral capsulorhexis. The average value for the strain for rabbit eyes was 38±13% for central and 30±7% for peripheral capsulorhexis. Conclusion: The load that was applied to the capsulorhexis just before rupture was greater for a peripheral capsulorhexis than a central capsulorhexis in eye bank eyes (P=0.00164). The strain was also greater for a peripheral capsulorhexis as compared to a central (P=0.0516). For the rabbit eyes, the difference between maximum load and strain in the peripheral versus central regions was statistically insignificant. These patterns of applied stress were consistent with known capsule thickness profiles. Supported in part by the Florida Lions Eye Bank; Australian Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) Scheme, CRC for Eye Research and Technology, Sydney; Henri and Flore Lesieur Foundation, Palm Beach, FL.

Keywords: 338 cataract • 304 accommodation 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×