Chromatic pupillometry in multiple evanescent white dot syndrome masquerading as atypical optic neuritis

Basics, benefits, and pitfalls of pupillometers assessing visual function

Numerous commercially and non-commercially available pupillometers are nowadays able to assess various biological functions in humans, by evaluating pupils' dynamics in response to specific stimuli. However, the use of pupillometers for ophthalmic afferent evaluations (i.e., photoreceptoral responses) in real-world settings is relatively limited. Recent scientific and technological advances, coupled with artificial intelligence methods have improved the performance of such devices to objectively detect, quantify, and classify functional disturbances of the retina and the optic nerve. This review aims to summarize the scientific principles, indications, outcomes, and current limitations of pupillometry used for evaluation of afferent pathways in ophthalmic clinical settings.

Differences in the pupillary responses to evening light between children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

In the mammalian retina, intrinsically-photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGC) detect light and integrate signals from rods and cones to drive multiple non-visual functions including circadian entrainment and the pupillary light response (PLR). Non-visual photoreception and consequently non-visual sensitivity to light may change across child development. The PLR represents a quick and reliable method for examining non-visual responses to light in children. The purpose of this study was to assess differences in the PLRs to blue and red stimuli, measured one hour prior to bedtime, between children and adolescents.

METHODS

Forty healthy participants (8-9 years, n = 21; 15-16 years, n = 19) completed a PLR assessment 1 h before their habitual bedtime. After a 1 h dim-light adaptation period (< 1 lx), baseline pupil diameter was measured in darkness for 30 s, followed by a 10 s exposure to 3.0 × 1013 photons/cm2/s of either red (627 nm) or blue (459 nm) light, and a 40 s recovery in darkness to assess pupillary re-dilation. Subsequently, participants underwent 7 min of dim-light re-adaptation followed by an exposure to the other light condition. Lights were counterbalanced across participants.

RESULTS

Across both age groups, maximum pupil constriction was significantly greater (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.48) and more sustained (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.41) during exposure to blue compared to red light. For adolescents, the post-illumination pupillary response (PIPR), a hallmark of melanopsin function, was larger after blue compared with red light (p = 0.02, d = 0.60). This difference was not observed in children. Across light exposures, children had larger phasic (p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.20) and maximal (p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.22) pupil constrictions compared to adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

Blue light elicited a greater and more sustained pupillary response than red light in children and adolescents. However, the overall amplitude of the rod/cone-driven phasic response was greater in children than in adolescents. Our findings using the PLR highlight a higher sensitivity to evening light in children compared to adolescents, and continued maturation of the human non-visual photoreception/system throughout development.

Handheld chromatic pupillometry can reliably detect functional glaucomatous damage in eyes with high myopia

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To assess pupillary light responses (PLRs) in eyes with high myopia (HM) and evaluate the ability of handheld chromatic pupillometry (HCP) to identify glaucomatous functional loss in eyes with HM.

METHODS

This prospective, cross-sectional study included 28 emmetropes (EM), 24 high myopes without glaucoma (HM) and 17 high myopes with confirmed glaucoma (HMG), recruited at the Singapore National Eye Center. Monocular PLRs were evaluated using a custom-built handheld pupillometer that recorded changes in horizontal pupil radius in response to 9 s of exponentially increasing blue (469.1 nm) and red (640.1 nm) lights. Fifteen pupillometric features were compared between groups. A logistic regression model (LRM) was used to distinguish HMG eyes from non-glaucomatous eyes (EM and HM).

RESULTS

All pupillometric features were similar between EM and HM groups. Phasic constriction to blue (p<0.001) and red (p=0.006) lights, and maximum constriction to blue light (p<0.001) were reduced in HMG compared with EM and HM. Pupillometric features of melanopsin function (postillumination pupillary response, PIPR area under the curve (AUC) 0-12 s (p<0.001) and PIPR 6 s (p=0.01) to blue light) were reduced in HMG. Using only three pupillometric features, the LRM could classify glaucomatous from non-glaucomatous eyes with an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.00), sensitivity 94.1% (95% CI 82.4% to 100.0%) and specificity 78.8% (95% CI 67.3% to 90.4%).

CONCLUSION

PLRs to ramping-up light stimuli are unaltered in highly myopic eyes without other diagnosed ocular conditions. Conversely, HCP can distinguish glaucomatous functional loss in eyes with HM and can be a useful tool to detect/confirm the presence of glaucoma in patients with HM.

Retinal neural dysfunction in diabetes revealed with handheld chromatic pupillometry

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the ability of handheld chromatic pupillometry to reveal and localise retinal neural dysfunction in diabetic patients with and without diabetic retinopathy (DR).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 82 diabetics (DM) and 93 controls (60.4 ± 8.4 years, 44.1% males). DM patients included those without (n = 25, 64.7 ± 6.3 years, 44.0% males) and with DR (n = 57, 60.3 ± 8.5 years, 64.9% males). Changes in horizontal pupil radius in response to blue (469 nm) and red (640 nm) light stimuli were assessed monocularly, in clinics, using a custom-built handheld pupillometer. Pupillometric parameters (phasic constriction amplitudes [predominantly from the outer retina], maximal constriction amplitudes [from the inner and outer retina] and post-illumination pupillary responses [PIPRs; predominantly from the inner retina]) were extracted from baseline-adjusted pupillary light response traces and compared between controls, DM without DR, and DR. Net PIPR was defined as the difference between blue and red PIPRs.

RESULTS

Phasic constriction amplitudes to blue and red lights were decreased in DR compared to controls (p < 0.001; p < 0.001). Maximal constriction amplitudes to blue and red lights were decreased in DR compared to DM without DR (p < 0.001; p = 0.02), and in DM without DR compared to controls (p < 0.001; p = 0.005). Net PIPR was decreased in both DR and DM without DR compared to controls (p = 0.02; p = 0.03), suggesting a wavelength-dependent (and hence retinal) pupillometric dysfunction in diabetic patients with or without DR.

CONCLUSIONS

Handheld chromatic pupillometry can reveal retinal neural dysfunction in diabetes, even without DR. Patients with DM but no DR displayed primarily inner retinal dysfunction, while patients with DR showed both inner and outer retinal dysfunction.