Cargando…
Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry
OBJECTIVE: Continuous and intermittent stimuli with green light affect the pupillary light response (PLR) differently. Since the majority of pupillometric studies use blue and red lights, we investigated the effect of continuous and intermittent stimulations on the PLR using red and blue lights. MET...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775973/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29387040 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00746 |
_version_ | 1783293998233812992 |
---|---|
author | Ba-Ali, Shakoor Lund-Andersen, Henrik Ahmadi, Hamid Brøndsted, Adam Elias |
author_facet | Ba-Ali, Shakoor Lund-Andersen, Henrik Ahmadi, Hamid Brøndsted, Adam Elias |
author_sort | Ba-Ali, Shakoor |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Continuous and intermittent stimuli with green light affect the pupillary light response (PLR) differently. Since the majority of pupillometric studies use blue and red lights, we investigated the effect of continuous and intermittent stimulations on the PLR using red and blue lights. METHODS: Seventeen healthy subjects underwent continuous- and intermittent light stimuli, using red (643 nm) and blue light (463 nm). To avoid the influence of pupil size on the amount of light entering the eye, the procedures were repeated with the stimulus–eye in dilated condition. The maximal pupillary constriction and the early redilation phase of post-illumination pupillary response (PIPR(Early)) represented the mixed response of melanopsin and rod–cone photoreceptors. The late redilation phase of PIPR (PIPR(Late)) was the marker of melanopsin-containing retinal ganglion cells. RESULTS: Intermittent stimuli with blue light elicited significantly larger maximal contraction during dilated condition (P = 0.001), and larger sustained pupillary contraction under dilated as well as undilated condition (P < 0.001) compared to continuous light exposure. Except the PIPR(Early) during undilated condition, none of the PIPR metrics were significantly different between intermittent and continuous blue light stimuli. Intermittent red light stimuli elicited also a more sustained pupillary contraction regardless of mydriatic instillation (P ≤ 0.02). In addition, intermittent red light exposure resulted in a slightly larger PIPR(Early) under undilated condition (P = 0.02) and a slightly larger PIPR(Late) under dilated condition (P = 0.049). Except the PIPR(Late) to continuous red light stimulus, all PIPR parameters were larger when the light was presented after induction of unilateral mydriasis. CONCLUSION: PLR parameters during and after light exposures depend on both the light stimulation mode and the entrance pupillary size. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5775973 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57759732018-01-31 Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry Ba-Ali, Shakoor Lund-Andersen, Henrik Ahmadi, Hamid Brøndsted, Adam Elias Front Neurol Neuroscience OBJECTIVE: Continuous and intermittent stimuli with green light affect the pupillary light response (PLR) differently. Since the majority of pupillometric studies use blue and red lights, we investigated the effect of continuous and intermittent stimulations on the PLR using red and blue lights. METHODS: Seventeen healthy subjects underwent continuous- and intermittent light stimuli, using red (643 nm) and blue light (463 nm). To avoid the influence of pupil size on the amount of light entering the eye, the procedures were repeated with the stimulus–eye in dilated condition. The maximal pupillary constriction and the early redilation phase of post-illumination pupillary response (PIPR(Early)) represented the mixed response of melanopsin and rod–cone photoreceptors. The late redilation phase of PIPR (PIPR(Late)) was the marker of melanopsin-containing retinal ganglion cells. RESULTS: Intermittent stimuli with blue light elicited significantly larger maximal contraction during dilated condition (P = 0.001), and larger sustained pupillary contraction under dilated as well as undilated condition (P < 0.001) compared to continuous light exposure. Except the PIPR(Early) during undilated condition, none of the PIPR metrics were significantly different between intermittent and continuous blue light stimuli. Intermittent red light stimuli elicited also a more sustained pupillary contraction regardless of mydriatic instillation (P ≤ 0.02). In addition, intermittent red light exposure resulted in a slightly larger PIPR(Early) under undilated condition (P = 0.02) and a slightly larger PIPR(Late) under dilated condition (P = 0.049). Except the PIPR(Late) to continuous red light stimulus, all PIPR parameters were larger when the light was presented after induction of unilateral mydriasis. CONCLUSION: PLR parameters during and after light exposures depend on both the light stimulation mode and the entrance pupillary size. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5775973/ /pubmed/29387040 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00746 Text en Copyright © 2018 Ba-Ali, Lund-Andersen, Ahmadi and Brøndsted. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Ba-Ali, Shakoor Lund-Andersen, Henrik Ahmadi, Hamid Brøndsted, Adam Elias Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title | Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title_full | Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title_fullStr | Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title_full_unstemmed | Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title_short | Effect of Intermittent versus Continuous Light Exposure on Pupillary Light Response, As Evaluated by Pupillometry |
title_sort | effect of intermittent versus continuous light exposure on pupillary light response, as evaluated by pupillometry |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775973/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29387040 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00746 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT baalishakoor effectofintermittentversuscontinuouslightexposureonpupillarylightresponseasevaluatedbypupillometry AT lundandersenhenrik effectofintermittentversuscontinuouslightexposureonpupillarylightresponseasevaluatedbypupillometry AT ahmadihamid effectofintermittentversuscontinuouslightexposureonpupillarylightresponseasevaluatedbypupillometry AT brøndstedadamelias effectofintermittentversuscontinuouslightexposureonpupillarylightresponseasevaluatedbypupillometry |