Effect of a yellow filter on mesopic contrast perception and differential light sensitivity in the visual field

The Effect of Yellow Filter Use on Standard Automated Perimetry and Contrast Sensitivity in Healthy Individuals

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of two yellow filters (category 1: visible light transmission {VLT} from 80% to 43%) of Essilor (Kiros® and Lumior®) on standard automated perimetry (SAP) indices and Pelli-Robson (PR) contrast sensitivity (CS) testing in healthy individuals. Materials and methods This study is a prospective comparative study of 31 eyes of 31 healthy individuals aged 32.14 (8.13) years (14 males and 17 females). All participants underwent a series of three visual field (VF) examinations (24-2, Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm {SITA} standard) with the Humphrey field analyzer (HFA II 740, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and three CS examinations with the PR chart (Precision Vision, Inc., Woodstock, IL). VF and CS examinations were carried out as follows: (a) no filter (NF), (b) with the yellow filter Kiros® (KIROS), and (c) with the yellow-orange filter Lumior® (LUMIOR). The effect of the two yellow filters on global VF indices (glaucoma hemifield test {GHT}, mean deviation {MD}, pattern standard deviation {PSD}, and visual field index {VFI}) and on CS score was evaluated and compared. Results When comparing the three pairs NF-KIROS, NF-LUMIOR, and KIROS-LUMIOR, no difference was presented on the global VF indices. However, a statistically significant difference was detected in the CS scores for all three pairs, favoring KIROS. It is important to note that while this difference was statistically significant, it did not reach clinical significance. Conclusions The use of yellow filters (category 1: VLT of 75% and 65%) does not affect the global VF indices and the CS of healthy individuals but significantly improves their CS score. Further studies are required to explore the clinical significance of these findings.

Neuronal Responses to Short Wavelength Light Deficiency in the Rat Subcortical Visual System

The amount and spectral composition of light changes considerably during the day, with dawn and dusk being the most crucial moments when light is within the mesopic range and short wavelength enriched. It was recently shown that animals use both cues to adjust their internal circadian clock, thereby their behavior and physiology, with the solar cycle. The role of blue light in circadian processes and neuronal responses is well established, however, an unanswered question remains: how do changes in the spectral composition of light (short wavelengths blocking) influence neuronal activity? In this study we addressed this question by performing electrophysiological recordings in image (dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus; dLGN) and non-image (the olivary pretectal nucleus; OPN, the suprachiasmatic nucleus; SCN) visual structures to determine neuronal responses to spectrally varied light stimuli. We found that removing short-wavelength from the polychromatic light (cut off at 525 nm) attenuates the most transient ON and sustained cells in the dLGN and OPN, respectively. Moreover, we compared the ability of different types of sustained OPN neurons (either changing or not their response profile to filtered polychromatic light) to irradiance coding, and show that both groups achieve it with equal efficacy. On the other hand, even very dim monochromatic UV light (360 nm; log 9.95 photons/cm²/s) evokes neuronal responses in the dLGN and SCN. To our knowledge, this is the first electrophysiological experiment supporting previous behavioral findings showing visual and circadian functions disruptions under short wavelength blocking environment. The current results confirm that neuronal activity in response to polychromatic light in retinorecipient structures is affected by removing short wavelengths, however, with type and structure – specific action. Moreover, they show that rats are sensitive to even very dim UV light.

Effects of absolute luminance and luminance contrast on visual discrimination in low mesopic environments

Recent research revealed considerable decline in visual perception under low luminance conditions. However, systematic studies on how visual performance is affected by absolute luminance and luminance contrast under low mesopic conditions (<0.5 cd/m²) is lacking. We examined performance in a simple visual discrimination task under low mesopic luminance conditions in three experiments in which we systematically varied base luminance and luminance contrast between stimulus and background. We further manipulated eccentricity of the stimuli because of known rods and cones gradients along the retina. We identified a "deficiency window" for performance as measured by d' when luminance was < 0.06 cd/m² and luminance contrast as measured by the luminance ratio between stimulus and background was below < 1.7. We further calculated performance-based luminance as well as contrast efficiency functions for reaction times (RTs). These power functions demonstrate the contrast asymptote needed to decrease RTs and how such a decrease can be achieved given various combinations of absolute luminance and luminance contrast manipulations. Increased eccentricity resulted in slower RTs indicative of longer scan distances. Our data provide initial insights to performance-based efficiency functions in low mesopic environments that are currently lacking and to the physical mechanisms being utilized for visual perception in these extreme environments.

The visual effects of intraocular colored filters

Modern life is associated with a myriad of visual problems, most notably refractive conditions such as myopia. Human ingenuity has addressed such problems using strategies such as spectacle lenses or surgical correction. There are other visual problems, however, that have been present throughout our evolutionary history and are not as easily solved by simply correcting refractive error. These problems include issues like glare disability and discomfort arising from intraocular scatter, photostress with the associated transient loss in vision that arises from short intense light exposures, or the ability to see objects in the distance through a veil of atmospheric haze. One likely biological solution to these more long-standing problems has been the use of colored intraocular filters. Many species, especially diurnal, incorporate chromophores from numerous sources (e.g., often plant pigments called carotenoids) into ocular tissues to improve visual performance outdoors. This review summarizes information on the utility of such filters focusing on chromatic filtering by humans.

EFFECT OF TINTED OPTICAL FILTERS ON VISUAL ACUITY AND CONTRAST SENSITIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA

PURPOSE

To ascertain the effect of tinted optical filters (TFs) on visual function in patients with inflammatory cystoid macular edema (CME).

METHODS

A prospective study included 14 patients with inflammatory CME and best-corrected visual acuity between 0.1 and 0.8 (CME group) and 16 sex-, age-, and best-corrected visual acuity-matched patients with macular disorders but no CME (non-CME group). All patients from both groups underwent the following tests: determination of visual acuity at distance, contrast sensitivity (CS) testing; and subjective grading of each TF for best-corrected visual acuity and CS compared with no TFs. All tests were performed with the following TFs: Corning photochromic filter with a cutoff at 450 nm; Zeiss filter with a cutoff at 560 nm; and cheap widely available yellow filter with a cutoff at 489 nm.

RESULTS

Without TFs, the CME and non-CME groups did not differ in best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.79). Using the TFs, a clinically significant improvement was not achieved by any patient. However, using the definition of any improvement, best-corrected visual acuity with all TFs showed a significant improvement in the CME group compared with no TFs (P < 0.01). The CME group rated the Corning photochromic filter with a cutoff of 450 nm significantly higher than the other TFs when determining visual acuity (P = 0.05) and CS (P = 0.01) in contrast to no improvement in the non-CME group.

CONCLUSION

Although the use of TFs for the CME patients was not associated with criteria of clinically significant improvement, our results indicate that visual acuity and CS in patients with inflammatory CME might benefit from the use of TFs.

Effect of a Yellow Filter on Contrast Sensitivity and Disability Glare After Laser in situ Keratomileusis Under Mesopic and Photopic Conditions

PURPOSE

To analyze the effect of a yellow filter on contrast sensitivity and disability glare under mesopic and photopic luminance conditions in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) patients and control subjects.

METHODS

Contrast sensitivity with and without glare was determined in 27 patients who had undergone LASIK at least 1 year previously and in 30 control subjects. Tests were performed with and without a coated yellow filter (X-482 nm cut-off) using the Mesotest II or Mesoptometer II (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) under mesopic conditions, and the Contrast Glaretester 1000 (Takagi, Seiko Co Ltd, Nagano, Japan) under photopic conditions.

RESULTS

Under mesopic conditions, log contrast sensitivity without glare decreased by 0.14 log units in the LASIK group. When the yellow filter was used, this variable showed a significant increase of 0.04 log units and the proportion of patients able to discriminate the mesopic contrast limit of 1:5 rose from 70% to 78%. With glare, the yellow filter also improved contrast sensitivity in LASIK patients, but not significantly. Under photopic conditions, no statistical differences were observed between results obtained with and without the yellow filter in the LASIK group or between the LASIK and control group without glare.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesopic contrast sensitivity without glare was worse in LASIK patients and increased significantly with the yellow filter. The filter had no effect under photopic conditions. No disability glare differences were noted between the LASIK and control groups or between the LASIK without and with filter groups under mesopic and photopic conditions.