English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose:  Ocular biomechanics is an assessment of the response of the structures of the eye to forces that may lead to disease development and progression, or influence the response to surgical intervention. The goals of this review are (1) to introduce basic biomechanical principles and terminology, (2) to provide perspective on the progress made in the clinical study and assessment of ocular biomechanics, and (3) to highlight critical studies conducted in keratoconus, laser refractive surgery, and glaucoma in order to aid interpretation of biomechanical parameters in the laboratory and in the clinic. Methods:  A literature review was first conducted of basic biomechanical studies related to ocular tissue. The subsequent review of ocular biomechanical studies was limited to those focusing on keratoconus, laser refractive surgery, or glaucoma using the only two commercially available devices that allow rapid assessment of biomechanical response in the clinic. Results:  Foundational studies on ocular biomechanics used a combination of computer modeling and destructive forces on ex-vivo tissues. The knowledge gained from these studies could not be directly translated to clinical research and practice until the introduction of non-contact tonometers that quantified the deformation response of the cornea to an air puff, which represents a non-destructive, clinically appropriate load. The corneal response includes a contribution from the sclera which may limit corneal deformation. Two commercial devices are available, the Ocular Response Analyzer which produces viscoelastic parameters with a customized load for each eye, and the Corvis ST which produces elastic parameters with a consistent load for every eye. Neither device produces the classic biomechanical properties reported in basic studies, but rather biomechanical deformation response parameters which require careful interpretation. Conclusions:  Research using clinical tools has enriched our understanding of how ocular disease alters ocular biomechanics, as well as how ocular biomechanics may influence the pathophysiology of ocular disease and response to surgical intervention.

Clinical Ocular Biomechanics: Where Are We after 20 Years of Progress?