Metrics of retinal image quality predict visual performance in eyes with 20/17 or better visual acuity

The Precision of Wavefront Refraction Compared to Subjective Refraction and Autorefraction

PURPOSE

To determine the precision (repeatability) of several methods of calculating refraction from higher-order wavefront aberration data and to compare these wavefront refractions with lower-order (LO) wavefront refraction, subjective refraction, and autorefraction.

METHODS

Four clinicians refracted 16 normal participants aged 23.6 +/- 1.2 years, 69% female with an average spherical equivalent refractive error of -3.03 +/- 2.55 D, median sphere -2.50 D (minimum -7.50, maximum +4.75), and median cylinder -0.50 D (minimum -3.00, maximum 0). Participants were cyclopleged and underwent subjective refraction, autorefraction on two machines (Nidek AR-800, Topcon KR-8000), and wavefront sensing using the Wavefront Sciences Complete Ophthalmic Analysis System. Wavefront error was used to calculate: LO refraction, refractions that incorporated higher-order spherical and astigmatism terms from up to the 4th, 6th, and 10th orders (PCM4, PCM6, and PCM10), and a method based on optimizing image quality metrics [wavefront analysis technology (WAT) refraction]. Within and between examiner agreements for total dioptric difference were determined using Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LOA).

RESULTS

The interexaminer LOA for individual measurements for M, J0, J45 were: Topcon (+/-0.18, +/-0.10, +/-0.06), Nidek (+/-0.28, +/-0.16, +/-0.09), LO (+/-0.17, +/-0.10, +/-0.06), PCM4 (+/-0.26, +/-0.09, +/-0.06), PCM6 (+/-0.37, +/-0.17, +/-0.34), PCM10 (+/-0.54, +/-0.32, +/-0.40), WAT (+/-0.28, +/-0.20, +/-0.15), and subjective refraction (+/-0.48, +/-0.20, +/-0.13) and averaging across three measures LOA: Topcon (+/-0.15, +/-0.08, +/-0.05), Nidek (+/-0.21, +/-0.13, +/-0.07), LO (+/-0.12, +/-0.06, +/-0.04), PCM4 (+/-0.16, +/-0.05, +/-0.04), PCM6 (+/-0.23, +/-0.09, +/-0.19), PCM10 (+/-0.29, +/-0.19, +/-0.24), and WAT (+/-0.18, +/-0.12, +/-0.10). The within-examiner LOA for M, J0, J45 were: Topcon (+/-0.08, +/-0.04, +/-0.02), Nidek (+/-0.13, +/-0.07, +/-0.05 D), LO (+/-0.11, +/-0.07, +/-0.04), PCM4 (+/-0.17, +/-0.07, +/-0.04 D), PCM6 (+/-0.28, +/-0.12, +/-0.24 D), PCM10 (+/-0.42, +/-0.24, +/-0.32 D), and WAT (+/-0.19, +/-0.14, +/-0.09 D).

CONCLUSIONS

All objective refractions except for PCM10 were more repeatable across clinicians than subjective refraction. The precision of all refractions were improved by an expected amount through averaging over multiple measurements. Wavefront refractions were not as precise as standard autorefractions, although not clinically significantly worse.

Three-dimensional relationship between high-order root-mean-square wavefront error, pupil diameter, and aging

We report root-mean-square (RMS) wavefront error (WFE) for individual aberrations and cumulative high-order (HO) RMS WFE for the normal human eye as a function of age by decade and pupil diameter in 1 mm steps from 3 to 7 mm and determine the relationship among HO RMS WFE, mean age for each decade of life, and luminance for physiologic pupil diameters. Subjects included 146 healthy individuals from 20 to 80 years of age. Ocular aberration was measured on the preferred eye of each subject (for a total of 146 eyes through dilated pupils; computed for 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 mm pupils; and described with a tenth-radial-order normalized Zernike expansion. We found that HO RMS WFE increases faster with increasing pupil diameter for any given age and pupil diameter than it does with increasing age alone. A planar function accounts for 99% of the variance in the 3-D space defined by mean log HO RMS WFE, mean age for each decade of life, and pupil diameter. When physiologic pupil diameters are used to estimate HO RMS WFE as a function of luminance and age, at low luminance (9 cd/m2) HO RMS WFE decreases with increasing age. This normative data set details (1) the 3-D relationship between HO RMS WFE and age for fixed pupil diameters and (2) the 3-D relationship among HO RMS WFE, age, and luminance for physiologic pupil diameters.

Custom optimization of intraocular lens asphericity

PURPOSE

To investigate the optimal amount of ocular spherical aberration (SA) in an intraocular lens (IOL) to maximize optical quality.

METHODS

In 154 eyes of 94 patients aged 40 to 80 years, implantation of aspheric IOLs was simulated with different amounts of SA to produce residual ocular SA from -0.30 microm to +0.30 microm. Using the VOL-CT program (Sarver & Associates, Carbondale, Illinois), corneal wavefront aberrations up to 6th order were computed from corneal topographic elevation data (Humphrey Atlas, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc, Dublin, California). Using the ZernikeTool program (Advanced Medical Optics, Inc, Santa Ana, California), the polychromatic point spread function with Stiles-Crawford effect was calculated for the residual ocular higher-order aberrations (HOAs, 3rd to 6th order, 6-mm pupil), assuming fully corrected 2nd-order aberrations. Five parameters were used to quantify optical image quality, and we determined the residual ocular SA at which the maximal image quality was achieved for each eye. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed to assess the predictors for optimal SA of each eye.

RESULTS

The optimal SA varied widely among eyes. Most eyes had best image quality with low amounts of negative SA. For modulation transfer function volume up to 15 cycles/degree, the amount of optimal SA could be predicted based on other HOAs of the cornea with coefficient of multiple determination (R(2)) of 79%. Eight Zernike terms significantly contributed to the optimal SA in this model; the order of importance to optimal SA from most to least was: Z(6)(0), Z(6)2, Z(4)2, Z(5)3, Z(6)4, Z(3)(-1), Z(3)3, and Z(3)1. For the other 4 measures of visual quality, the coefficients of determination varied from 32% to 63%.

CONCLUSION

The amount of ocular SA producing best image quality varied widely among subjects and could be predicted based on corneal HOAs. Selection of an aspheric IOL should be customized according to the full spectrum of corneal HOAs and not 4th-order SA alone.