IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ethier, C. R.
Right arrow Articles by Richardson, T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ethier, C. R.
Right arrow Articles by Richardson, T. M.

Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol 27, 1741-1750, Copyright © 1986 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology

ARTICLES AND REPORTS

Calculations of flow resistance in the juxtacanalicular meshwork

CR Ethier, RD Kamm, BA Palaszewski, MC Johnson and TM Richardson

The structure of the juxtacanalicular meshwork (JCM) was analyzed morphometrically, and the resulting data were used to calculate the resistance to flow through this tissue. Two models of the JCM were presented and compared. In the first (Model A), aqueous humor was assumed to flow via open channels within a solid framework, while, in the second (Model B), these open spaces were assumed to be filled with extracellular matrix gel. An expression giving the resistance of such a gel as a function of gel concentration was presented and tested on corneal and scleral stroma. Morphometry of normal and glaucomatous human eyes showed that Model A underpredicted the resistance of the JCM by factors of 10-100, suggesting that a GAG or proteoglycan gel may control the flow resistance of this tissue. This was supported by Model B, which showed that measured bulk concentrations of GAGs were consistent with gel concentrations needed to account for the estimated resistance of the JCM in vivo. Some limitations and implications of Model B were discussed.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1986 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology