» Articles » PMID: 39230993

Iris Morphological and Biomechanical Factors Influencing Angle Closure During Pupil Dilation

Overview
Specialty Ophthalmology
Date 2024 Sep 4
PMID 39230993
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To use finite element (FE) analysis to assess what morphologic and biomechanical factors of the iris and anterior chamber are more likely to influence angle narrowing during pupil dilation.

Methods: The study consisted of 1344 FE models comprising the cornea, sclera, lens, and iris to simulate pupil dilation. For each model, we varied the following parameters: anterior chamber depth (ACD = 2-4 mm) and anterior chamber width (ACW = 10-12 mm), iris convexity (IC = 0-0.3 mm), iris thickness (IT = 0.3-0.5 mm), stiffness (E = 4-24 kPa), and Poisson's ratio (v = 0-0.3). We evaluated the change in (△∠) and the final dilated angles (∠f) from baseline to dilation for each parameter.

Results: The final dilated angles decreased with a smaller ACD (∠f = 53.4° ± 12.3° to 21.3° ± 14.9°), smaller ACW (∠f = 48.2° ± 13.5° to 26.2° ± 18.2°), larger IT (∠f = 52.6° ± 12.3° to 24.4° ± 15.1°), larger IC (∠f = 45.0° ± 19.2° to 33.9° ± 16.5°), larger E (∠f = 40.3° ± 17.3° to 37.4° ± 19.2°), and larger v (∠f = 42.7° ± 17.7° to 34.2° ± 18.1°). The change in angles increased with larger ACD (△∠ = 9.37° ± 11.1° to 15.4° ± 9.3°), smaller ACW (△∠ = 7.4° ± 6.8° to 16.4° ± 11.5°), larger IT (△∠ = 5.3° ± 7.1° to 19.3° ± 10.2°), smaller IC (△∠ = 5.4° ± 8.2° to 19.5° ± 10.2°), larger E (△∠ = 10.9° ± 12.2° to 13.1° ± 8.8°), and larger v (△∠ = 8.1° ± 9.4° to 16.6° ± 10.4°).

Conclusions: The morphology of the iris (IT and IC) and its innate biomechanical behavior (E and v) were crucial in influencing the way the iris deformed during dilation, and angle closure was further exacerbated by decreased anterior chamber biometry (ACD and ACW).

References
1.
Pant A, Gogte P, Pathak-Ray V, Dorairaj S, Amini R . Increased Iris Stiffness in Patients With a History of Angle-Closure Glaucoma: An Image-Based Inverse Modeling Analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018; 59(10):4134-4142. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.18-24327. View

2.
Mapstone R . Mechanics of pupil block. Br J Ophthalmol. 1968; 52(1):19-25. PMC: 506517. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.52.1.19. View

3.
Yim-Lui Cheung C, Liu S, Weinreb R, Liu J, Li H, Leung D . Dynamic analysis of iris configuration with anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010; 51(8):4040-6. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.09-3941. View

4.
Huang G, Gonzalez E, Peng P, Lee R, Leeungurasatien T, He M . Anterior chamber depth, iridocorneal angle width, and intraocular pressure changes after phacoemulsification: narrow vs open iridocorneal angles. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011; 129(10):1283-90. DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.272. View

5.
Johnson M, McLaren J, Overby D . Unconventional aqueous humor outflow: A review. Exp Eye Res. 2016; 158:94-111. PMC: 4970980. DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2016.01.017. View