Iris Morphological and Biomechanical Factors Influencing Angle Closure During Pupil Dilation

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Purpose To use finite element (FE) analysis to assess what morphological and biomechanical factors of the iris and of the anterior chamber are more likely to influence angle narrowing during pupil dilation. Methods The study consisted of 1,344 FE models comprising of the cornea, sclera, lens and iris (stroma, sphincter and dilator tissues) to simulate pupil dilation and to assess changes in angle. For each model, we varied the following parameters: anterior chamber depth (ACD = 2 –4 mm) and width (ACW = 10–12 mm), iris convexity (IC = 0–0.3 mm), thickness (IT = 0.3–0.5 mm), stiffness ( E = 4–24 kPa) and Poisson’s ratio ( v = 0–0.3), and simulated pupil dilation. We evaluated for the change in anterior chamber angle (△∠) and the final dilated anterior chamber angles (∠ f ) from baseline to dilation for each parameter. Results The final dilated AC angles decreased with a smaller ACD (∠ f = 53.4°±12.3° to 21.3°±14.9°), smaller ACW (∠ f = 48.2°±13.5° to 26.2°±18.2°), larger IT (∠ f = 52.6°±12.3° to 24.4°±15.1°), larger IC (∠ f = 45.0°±19.2° to 33.9°±16.5°), larger E (∠ f = 40.3°±17.3° to 37.4°±19.2°) and larger v (∠ f = 42.7°±17.7° to 34.2°±18.1°). The change in AC angle increased with larger ACD (△∠ = 9.37°±11.1° to 15.4°±9.3°), smaller ACW (△∠ = 7.4°±6.8° to 16.4°±11.5°), larger IT (△∠ = 5.3°±7.1° to 19.3°±10.2°), smaller IC (△∠ = 5.4°±8.2° to 19.5°±10.2°), larger E (△∠ = 10.9°±12.2° to 13.1°±8.8°) and larger v (△∠ = 8.1°±9.4° to 16.6°±10.4°). Conclusions This parametric study offered valuable insights into the factors that could influence angle closure. The morphology of the iris (IT and IC) and its innate biomechanical behavior ( E and v ) were crucial in influencing the way the iris deformed during dilation, and angle closure was further exacerbated by decreased AC biometry (ACD and ACW).
Full text 2,004 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Purpose To use finite element (FE) analysis to assess what morphological and biomechanical factors of the iris and of the anterior chamber are more likely to influence angle narrowing during pupil dilation.

Methods

The study consisted of 1,344 FE models comprising of the cornea, sclera, lens and iris (stroma, sphincter and dilator tissues) to simulate pupil dilation and to assess changes in angle. For each model, we varied the following parameters: anterior chamber depth (ACD = 2 –4 mm) and width (ACW = 10–12 mm), iris convexity (IC = 0–0.3 mm), thickness (IT = 0.3–0.5 mm), stiffness (E = 4–24 kPa) and Poisson’s ratio (v = 0–0.3), and simulated pupil dilation. We evaluated for the change in anterior chamber angle (△∠) and the final dilated anterior chamber angles (∠f) from baseline to dilation for each parameter.

Results

The final dilated AC angles decreased with a smaller ACD (∠f = 53.4°±12.3° to 21.3°±14.9°), smaller ACW (∠f = 48.2°±13.5° to 26.2°±18.2°), larger IT (∠f = 52.6°±12.3° to 24.4°±15.1°), larger IC (∠f = 45.0°±19.2° to 33.9°±16.5°), larger E (∠f = 40.3°±17.3° to 37.4°±19.2°) and larger v (∠f = 42.7°±17.7° to 34.2°±18.1°). The change in AC angle increased with larger ACD (△∠ = 9.37°±11.1° to 15.4°±9.3°), smaller ACW (△∠ = 7.4°±6.8° to 16.4°±11.5°), larger IT (△∠ = 5.3°±7.1° to 19.3°±10.2°), smaller IC (△∠ = 5.4°±8.2° to 19.5°±10.2°), larger E (△∠ = 10.9°±12.2° to 13.1°±8.8°) and larger v (△∠ = 8.1°±9.4° to 16.6°±10.4°).

Conclusions

This parametric study offered valuable insights into the factors that could influence angle closure. The morphology of the iris (IT and IC) and its innate biomechanical behavior (E and v) were crucial in influencing the way the iris deformed during dilation, and angle closure was further exacerbated by decreased AC biometry (ACD and ACW). Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00