{"title":"Pupillary dynamics and accommodative response in mild traumatic brain injury.","authors":"Pritam Dutta, Ayisha Atiya, Smita Vittal, S Ambika, Jameel Rizwana Hussaindeen","doi":"10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To measure the pupillary dynamics and accommodative response in individuals with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) as compared to age-matched controls.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective comparative study was carried out at the neuro-optometry clinic of a tertiary eye care hospital. Sixty-three subjects with a history of mTBI and ninety age-matched controls were enrolled in this study. Subjects in the age range of 18-35 years were included in the study. A comprehensive neuro-optometric assessment was performed followed by pupillary dynamics and accommodation response measurements using NeurOptics® pupillary light reflex™-3000 and Grand-Seiko WAM-5500 binocular accommodation auto ref/keratometer | shigiya machinery works LTD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A statistically significant difference was noticed for constriction percentage (%): 32.73 ± 9.20 versus 39.93 ± 7.36 (<i>P</i> < 0.001), average constriction velocity (mm/s): 2.24 ± 0.85 versus 2.62 ± 0.68 (<i>P</i> = 0.002), maximum constriction velocity (mm/s): 3.82 ± 1.33 versus 4.42 ± 0.93 (<i>P</i> = 0.004) and T75 (recovery period to 75% of the baseline pupillary diameter in sec): 1.38 ± 0.36 versus 2.0 ± 0.82 (<i>P</i> < 0.001) in mTBI compared to age-matched controls. A statistically significant difference was noted for accommodative response (in D) as well as in the sample as compared to age-matched controls: -1.12 ± 0.64 versus - 1.39 ± 0.47 (<i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pupillary constriction velocities and accommodative response are significantly affected in mTBI. These findings have important clinical implications in being able to understand the visual symptoms following an mTBI.</p>","PeriodicalId":44978,"journal":{"name":"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11253999/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/tjo.TJO-D-22-00169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To measure the pupillary dynamics and accommodative response in individuals with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) as compared to age-matched controls.
Materials and methods: This prospective comparative study was carried out at the neuro-optometry clinic of a tertiary eye care hospital. Sixty-three subjects with a history of mTBI and ninety age-matched controls were enrolled in this study. Subjects in the age range of 18-35 years were included in the study. A comprehensive neuro-optometric assessment was performed followed by pupillary dynamics and accommodation response measurements using NeurOptics® pupillary light reflex™-3000 and Grand-Seiko WAM-5500 binocular accommodation auto ref/keratometer | shigiya machinery works LTD.
Results: A statistically significant difference was noticed for constriction percentage (%): 32.73 ± 9.20 versus 39.93 ± 7.36 (P < 0.001), average constriction velocity (mm/s): 2.24 ± 0.85 versus 2.62 ± 0.68 (P = 0.002), maximum constriction velocity (mm/s): 3.82 ± 1.33 versus 4.42 ± 0.93 (P = 0.004) and T75 (recovery period to 75% of the baseline pupillary diameter in sec): 1.38 ± 0.36 versus 2.0 ± 0.82 (P < 0.001) in mTBI compared to age-matched controls. A statistically significant difference was noted for accommodative response (in D) as well as in the sample as compared to age-matched controls: -1.12 ± 0.64 versus - 1.39 ± 0.47 (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Pupillary constriction velocities and accommodative response are significantly affected in mTBI. These findings have important clinical implications in being able to understand the visual symptoms following an mTBI.