Purpose: To assess whether the double-pass technique can be employed to quantify the amount of light scattering in patients with uveitis. Methods: 56 eyes of 44 patients with intraocular inflammation were consecutively recruited from the uveitis clinic over 9 months. The degree of intraocular inflammation was recorded according to the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature criteria and the eyes were grouped as having anterior, intermediate, posterior or panuveitis. Objective scatter index (OSI) was assessed using a double-pass technique with the Optical Quality Analysis System II. Results: Twenty-four eyes had anterior uveitis, 9 eyes had intermediate uveitis, 10 eyes had posterior uveitis and 13 eyes had panuveitis. The OSI was significantly different between all 4 groups (p = 0.0005). The mean OSI was highest in eyes with anterior uveitis (2.6 ± 3.1) and lowest in posterior uveitis (1.9 ± 1.3). Anterior chamber cells significantly correlated with OSI (R2 = 0.8726, p = 0.007), unlike posterior chamber cells (R2 = 0.0189, p = 0.588) and flare (R2 = 0.0048, p = 0.471). Conclusion: Patients with anterior uveitis have more ocular scatter, and anterior chamber cells scatter more light. This pilot study opens new avenues for research in use of the double-pass technique to assess light scattering in uveitis.

Keywords:
Uveitis, Ocular inflammation, Double-pass technique
1.
Allen MJ, Vos JJ: Ocular scattered light and visual performance as a function of age. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1967;44:717–727.
2.
Beckman C, Hard S, Abrahamsson M, Sjöstrand J: Evaluation of a clinical glare test based on estimation of intraocular light scatter. Optom Vis Sci 1991;68:881–887.
3.
Ansari RR: Ocular static and dynamic light scattering: a noninvasive diagnostic tool for eye research and clinical practice. J Biomed Opt 2004;9:22–37.
4.
Fujikado T, Kuroda T, Maeda N, et al: Light scatter and optical aberrations as objective parameters to predict deterioration in patients with cataract. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004;30:1198–1208.
5.
Prieto PM, Vargas-Martín F, Goelz S, Artal P: Analysis of the performance of the Hartmann-Shack sensor in the human eye. J Opt Soc Am A 2000;17:1388–1398.
6.
Flamant F: Etude de la repartition de lumière dans l’image rétinienne d’une fente. Rev Opt 1955;34:433–459.
7.
Santamaría J, Artal P, Bescós J: Determination of the point-spread function of human eyes using a hybrid optical-digital method. J Opt Soc Am A 1987;4:1109–1114.
8.
Artal P, Ferro M, Miranda I, Navarro R: Effects of aging in retinal image quality. J Opt Soc Am A 1993;10:1656–1662.
9.
Guirao A, González C, Redondo M, Geraghty E, Norrby S, Artal P: Average optical performance of the human eye as a function of age in a normal population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:203–213.
10.
Pujol J, Gispets J, Arjona M: Optical performance in eyes wearing two multifocal contact lenses design. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2003;23:347–360.
11.
Artal P, Marcos S, Navarro R, Miranda I, Ferro M: Through focus image quality of eyes implanted with monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses. Opt Eng 1995;34:772–779.
12.
Guirao A, Redondo M, Geraghty E, Piers P, Norrby S, Artal P: Corneal optical aberrations and retinal image quality in patients in whom monofocal intraocular lenses were implanted. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:1143–1151.
13.
Díaz-Doutón F, Benito A, Pujol J, Arjona M, Güell JL, Artal P: Comparison of the retinal image quality with a Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor and a double-pass instrument. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:1710–1716.
14.
Kobayashi K, Shibutani M, Takeuchi G, et al: Calculation of ocular single-pass modulation transfer function and retinal image simulation from measurements of the polarized double-pass ocular point. J Biomed Opt 2004;9:154–161.
15.
van den Berg TJ, Franssen L, Coppens JE: Straylight in the human eye: testing objectivity and optical character of the psychophysical measurement. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2009;29:345–350.
16.
Jabs DA, Nussenblatt RB, Rosenbaum JT, Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) Working Group: Standardization of uveitis nomenclature for reporting clinical data: results of the First International Workshop. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:509–516.
17.
Dhital A, Spalton DJ: Clinical reproducibility of the PSF measurements using the double-pass technique. Poster (accepted) Am Soc Cataract Refractive Surg Conf, Boston, 2010.
18.
Shah SM, Spalton DJ, Allen RJ, Smith SE: A comparison of the laser flare cell meter and fluorophotometry in assessment of the blood-aqueous barrier. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3124–3130.
19.
Spalton DJ: Ocular fluorophotometry. Br J Ophthalmol 1990;74:431–432.
20.
Anjou CIN, Krakau CET: A photographic method for measuring the aqueous flare of the eye in normal and pathological conditions. Acta Ophthalmologica 1960;38:178–224.
21.
Dyster-Aas HA, Krakau CET: A photoelectric instrument for measuring the aqueous flare in the intact eye. Ophthalmologica 1963;146:48–56.
22.
McLaren JW, Brubaker RF: A scanning ocular pectrofluorophotometer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1988;29:1285–1293.
23.
Sawa M, Tsurimaki Y, Tsuru T, Shimuzu H: New quantitative method to determine protein concentration and cell number in aqueous in vivo. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1988;32:132–142.
24.
Shah SM, Spalton DJ, Smith SE: Measurement of aqueous cells and flare in normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 1991;75:348–352.
25.
Lopez N, Artal P: Comparison of double-pass estimates of the retinal image quality obtained with green and near-infrared light. J Opt Soc Am A 1997;14:961–971.
26.
Saad A, Saab M, Gatinel D: Repeatability of measurements with double pass system. J Cataract Refract Surg 2010;1:28–33.
27.
Pérez GM, Manzanera S, Artal P: Impact of scattering and spherical aberration in contrast sensitivity. J Vis 2009;9:19.1–19.10.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
2010
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.