Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Astigmatism HELP
Based on 2,508 articles published since 2010
||||

These are the 2508 published articles about Astigmatism that originated from Worldwide during 2010-2020.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20
1 Guideline Guidelines for automated preschool vision screening: a 10-year, evidence-based update. 2013

Donahue, Sean P / Arthur, Brian / Neely, Daniel E / Arnold, Robert W / Silbert, David / Ruben, James B / Anonymous4400748. ·Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232-8808, USA. sean.donahue@vanderbilt.edu ·J AAPOS · Pubmed #23360915.

ABSTRACT: In 2003 the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee proposed criteria for automated preschool vision screening. Recent literature from epidemiologic and natural history studies, randomized controlled trials of amblyopia treatment, and field studies of screening technologies have been reviewed for the purpose of updating these criteria. The prevalence of amblyopia risk factors (ARF) is greater than previously suspected; many young children with low-magnitude ARFs do not develop amblyopia, and those who do often respond to spectacles alone. High-magnitude ARFs increase the likelihood of amblyopia. Although depth increases with age, amblyopia remains treatable until 60 months, with decline in treatment effectiveness after age 5. US Preventive Services Task Force Preventative Services Task Force guidelines allow photoscreening for children older than 36 months of age. Some technologies directly detect amblyopia rather than ARFs. Age-based criteria for ARF detection using photoscreening is prudent: referral criteria for such instruments should produce high specificity for ARF detection in young children and high sensitivity to detect amblyopia in older children. Refractive screening for ARFs for children aged 12-30 months should detect astigmatism >2.0 D, hyperopia >4.5 D, and anisometropia >2.5 D; for children aged 31-48 months, astigmatism >2.0 D, hyperopia > 4.0 D, and anisometropia >2.0 D. For children >49 months of age original criteria should be used: astigmatism >1.5 D, anisometropia>1.5 D, and hyperopia >3.5 D. Visually significant media opacities and manifest (not intermittent) strabismus should be detected at all ages. Instruments that detect amblyopia should report results using amblyopia presence as the gold standard. These new American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee guidelines will improve reporting of results and comparison of technologies.

2 Editorial Management of astigmatism during cataract surgery. 2019

Mamalis, Nick. ·Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #31030772.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

3 Editorial Editor's comment. 2018

Moshirfar, Majid. ·Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #30243400.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

4 Editorial Pursuing perfection in intraocular lens calculations: IV. Rethinking astigmatism analysis for intraocular lens-based surgery: Suggested terminology, analysis, and standards for outcome reports. 2018

Abulafia, Adi / Koch, Douglas D / Holladay, Jack T / Wang, Li / Hill, Warren. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #30243391.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

5 Editorial Optimizing Visual Outcomes of Cataract Surgery. 2015

Chee, Soon-Phaik / Jap, Aliza. ·From the *Singapore National Eye Centre; †Department of Ophthalmology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore; ‡Singapore Eye Research Institute; §Duke-National University of Singapore Graduate Medical School; and ¶Division of Ophthalmology, Changi General Hospital, Singapore. ·Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) · Pubmed #26401651.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

6 Editorial The posterior cornea: hiding in plain sight. 2015

Koch, Douglas D. ·Houston, Texas. ·Ophthalmology · Pubmed #26008908.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

7 Editorial JRS standard for reporting astigmatism outcomes of refractive surgery. 2014

Reinstein, Dan Z / Archer, Timothy J / Randleman, J Bradley. · ·J Refract Surg · Pubmed #25291747.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

8 Editorial Astigmatic correction in cataract surgery: lens or cornea? 2014

Dupps, William J. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #25263034.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

9 Editorial Refractive corneal lenticule extraction. 2014

Kohnen, Thomas. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #25135527.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

10 Editorial Astigmatism and vision: should all astigmatism always be corrected? 2014

Wolffsohn, James S / Bhogal, Gurpreet / Shah, Sunil. ·Ophthalmic Research Group, Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK. ·Br J Ophthalmol · Pubmed #24338839.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

11 Editorial Posterior corneal astigmatism. 2013

Kohnen, Thomas. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #24286837.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

12 Editorial Analyzing risk factors for amblyopia. 2013

Wagner, Rudolph S. · ·J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus · Pubmed #23914791.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

13 Editorial Combined collagen crosslinking treatments for keratoconus. 2013

Dupps, William J. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #23608564.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

14 Editorial Astigmatism measurements for cataract and refractive surgery. 2012

Kohnen, Thomas. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #23195253.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

15 Editorial Laser refractive surgery: have we arrived? 2012

Alio, Jorge L. · ·Br J Ophthalmol · Pubmed #22718793.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

16 Editorial Astigmatic manipulation with modern small-incision intraocular lens surgery. 2012

Kohnen, Thomas. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #22440431.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

17 Editorial Light-adjustable intraocular lens technology. 2011

Kohnen, Thomas. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #22108102.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

18 Editorial Advances in astigmatism management. 2011

Randleman, J Bradley. · ·J Refract Surg · Pubmed #21899240.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

19 Editorial Axis or meridian? 2011

Rosen, Emanuel. · ·J Cataract Refract Surg · Pubmed #21868193.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

20 Editorial Femtosecond laser-assisted keratoplasty. 2011

Yoo, Sonia H / Hurmeric, Volkan. · ·Am J Ophthalmol · Pubmed #21251491.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

21 Editorial Intraocular lenses in the 21st century. 2010

Wolffsohn, James S / Davies, Leon N. · ·Clin Exp Optom · Pubmed #21182658.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

22 Review [Current state of knowledge on special lenses]. 2020

Shajari, Mehdi / Priglinger, Siegfried / Kreutzer, Thomas. ·Augenklinik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Mathildenstr. 8, 80336, München, Deutschland. gms400@gmail.com. · Augenklinik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Mathildenstr. 8, 80336, München, Deutschland. ·Ophthalmologe · Pubmed #32112219.

ABSTRACT: Patients undergoing lens surgery nowadays have the option to choose between different intraocular lens (IOL) options depending on the ocular situation and personal preferences. For example, it is possible to implant a toric IOL to compensate for extensive corneal distortion or a multifocal IOL to have good visual acuity at various distances. The high level of competition in the lens market leads to fast development of new lens models giving patients the advantage to choose between a variety of options. This review article presents the most commonly used premium IOL options namely, aspheric, toric and multifocal IOLs and a summary of the current study situation for the different lens types. Compared to standard lenses, these lenses can improve uncorrected distance and near visual acuity; however, in some patients the added benefit can be only marginal and this is then an unnecessary cost factor for the patient. Furthermore, if inclusion and exclusion criteria are not respected the special forms of lenses can even lead to a poorer overall result.

23 Review The prevalence of refractive errors in the Middle East: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2020

Khoshhal, Fahimeh / Hashemi, Hassan / Hooshmand, Elham / Saatchi, Mohammad / Yekta, Abbasali / Aghamirsalim, Mohamadreza / Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi / Khabazkhoob, Mehdi. ·Department of Pediatrics, Dezful University of Medical Sciences, Dezful, Iran. · Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran. hhashemi@noorvision.com. · Iranian Research Center on Aging, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran. · Department of Epidemiology, School of Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. · Department of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. · Eye Research Center, Rassoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. · Refractive Errors Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. · Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ·Int Ophthalmol · Pubmed #32107693.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the prevalence of refractive errors in the Middle East region. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, a structured strategy was applied to search databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, databases as well as the reference lists of the selected articles to identify cross-sectional studies assessing the prevalence of refractive errors in the Middle East region until September 2019. The outcome measure was the prevalence of refractive errors, including myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism, in two age groups of ≤ 15 years and > 15 years. The study results were combined using a random effects model at a confidence level of 95%. RESULTS: The prevalence of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 4% (95% CI 4, 5), 8% (95% CI 6, 10), and 15% (95% CI 10, 19) in people less than or equal to 15 years and 30% (95% CI 25, 34), 21% (95% CI 15, 28), and 24% (95% CI 16, 31) in subjects over 15 years, respectively. The prevalence of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 3.5%, 12.4%, and 9.0% in male and 4.2%, 13.1%, and 9.9% in female subjects aged ≤ 15 years, respectively. In subjects aged > 15 years, the prevalence was 31.7%, 14.5%, and 31.5% in males and 31.9%, 11.2%, and 31% in females, respectively. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of hyperopia is relatively high in Middle Eastern children, while the prevalence of myopia is higher in adults in this region. It seems that astigmatism is not a serious refractive problem in this region compared to the rest of the world.

24 Review [Femtosecond laser-assisted astigmatic keratotomy]. 2020

Mirshahi, Alireza / Latz, Catharina. ·Augenklinik Dardenne, Friedrich-Ebert-Str. 23-25, 53177, Bonn, Deutschland. Mirshahi@dardenne.de. · Augenklinik Dardenne, Friedrich-Ebert-Str. 23-25, 53177, Bonn, Deutschland. ·Ophthalmologe · Pubmed #32072239.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: For more than 100 years keratotomy has been in the focus of ophthalmology as a treatment option for correction of astigmatism. Femtosecond laser technology provides a new level of precision, standardization and control as well as completely new options, such as purely intrastromal incisions. METHOD: The current literature is summarized with respect to femtosecond laser-assisted astigmatic keratotomy (FSAK) in combination with cataract surgery, where less astigmatic correction is necessary as well as after corneal surgery, such as perforating keratoplasty, where higher astigmatic errors need to be corrected. CONCLUSION: The FSAK provides a safe treatment option for both scenarios although larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to improve currently available nomograms.

25 Review How much astigmatism to treat in cataract surgery. 2020

Sigireddi, Rohini R / Weikert, Mitchell P. ·Department of Ophthalmology, Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. ·Curr Opin Ophthalmol · Pubmed #31770161.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Astigmatism correction in cataract surgery is a common surgical challenge. Although there are numerous approaches to its treatment during cataract surgery, there remains a lack of consensus on what level of postoperative astigmatism to target. We examine the literature to determine the effect of astigmatism on visual function and provide a recommendation on how much to treat in cataract surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Distance visual acuity decreases as myopic, hyperopic, or mixed astigmatism increases. Near visual acuity decreases with hyperopic astigmatism but improves with myopic astigmatism. The effect of astigmatism is generally independent of axis; however, against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism with mild myopia may benefit reading. A progressive ATR shift occurs with age whether or not an individual undergoes cataract surgery. In the presence of higher order aberrations, correction of astigmatism below 0.5 D shows minimal practical benefit. Presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) are sensitive to astigmatism but achieve distance visual acuities similar to monofocal IOLs and reach their full near and/or intermediate potential when residual astigmatism 0.5 D or less. SUMMARY: In cataract surgery, we recommend correction to 0.5 D or less of postoperative residual astigmatism to achieve optimum visual function and patient satisfaction following cataract surgery.

Next