Dataset Information

Prediction model for best focus, power, and spherical aberration of the cornea: Raytracing on a large dataset of OCT data.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To analyse corneal power based on a large optical coherence tomography dataset using raytracing, and to evaluate corneal power with respect to the corneal front apex plane for different definitions of best focus.

Methods

A large OCT dataset (10,218 eyes of 8,430 patients) from the Casia 2 (Tomey, Japan) was post-processed in MATLAB (MathWorks, USA). Using radius of curvature, corneal front and back surface asphericity, central corneal thickness, and pupil size (aperture) a bundle of rays was traced through the cornea. Various best focus definitions were tested: a) minimum wavefront error, b) root mean squared ray scatter, c) mean absolute ray scatter, and d) total spot diameter. All 4 target optimisation criteria were tested with each best focus plane. With the best-fit keratometer index the difference of corneal power and keratometric power was evaluated using a multivariate linear model.

Results

The mean corneal powers for a/b/c/d were 43.02±1.61/42.92±1.58/42.91±1.58/42.94±1.59 dpt respectively. The root mean squared deviations of corneal power from keratometric power (nK = 1.3317/1.3309/1.3308/1.3311 for a/b/c/d) were 0.308/0.185/0.171/0.209 dpt. With the multivariate linear model the respective RMS error was reduced to 0.110/0.052/0.043/0.065 dpt (R² = 0.872/0.921/0.935/0.904).

Conclusions

Raytracing improves on linear Gaussian optics by considering the asphericity of both refracting surfaces and using Snell's law of refraction in preference to paraxial simplifications. However, there is no unique definition of best focus, and therefore the calculated corneal power varies depending on the definition of best focus. The multivariate linear model enabled more precise estimation of corneal power compared to the simple keratometer equation.

SUBMITTER: Langenbucher A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7899355 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prediction model for best focus, power, and spherical aberration of the cornea: Raytracing on a large dataset of OCT data.

Langenbucher Achim A Szentmáry Nóra N Weisensee Johannes J Wendelstein Jascha J Cayless Alan A Menapace Rupert R Hoffmann Peter P

PloS one 20210222 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>To analyse corneal power based on a large optical coherence tomography dataset using raytracing, and to evaluate corneal power with respect to the corneal front apex plane for different definitions of best focus.<h4>Methods</h4>A large OCT dataset (10,218 eyes of 8,430 patients) from the Casia 2 (Tomey, Japan) was post-processed in MATLAB (MathWorks, USA). Using radius of curvature, corneal front and back surface asphericity, central corneal thickness, and pupil size (aperture) a ...[more]

PMID: 33617531

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo compare the peripheral refraction and spherical aberration profiles along three visual field meridians of 16 commercial single vision (SV), bifocal (BF) and multifocal (MF) test contact lenses with a single vision control.MethodForty-four participants [24.2±2.4 years, SE: -0.50 to -4.50D] were randomly fitted, contra-laterally, with 6 SV's [Air Optix Aqua (control), Acuvue Oasys, Biofinity, Clariti, Night & Day and Proclear], 3 BF's [Acuvue Bifocal low and high add, MiSight] and 8 MF's [Proclear D & N in 1.5 and 2.5D adds; AirOptix, PureVision low & high adds]. Peripheral refraction was performed across horizontal, oblique and vertical meridians, with lenses on eye using the BHVI-EyeMapper. The power vectors M, J0, J45 and the spherical aberration coefficient were analysed. The peripheral refraction and aberration profiles of the test lenses were compared with the profiles of the control lens using curvature and slope coefficients.ResultsCompared to the control, a relative peripheral hyperopic shift (M), a less negative J0 curvature coefficient along the horizontal meridian, a less positive J0 curvature coefficient along the vertical meridian, a less negative J45 curvature coefficient along the oblique meridian and a more positive spherical aberration curvature coefficient along most meridians was seen with the Acuvue Bifocal and all center-near multifocal lenses. For the center-distance multifocal lenses the direction of the curvature coefficients of the same refraction and aberration components was opposite to that of the center-near lenses. The greatest differences in the slope coefficients when compared to the control were found for the Acuvue Bifocal lenses and all multifocal contact lenses for the refractive component M and the spherical aberration coefficient along the horizontal visual field meridian, with the Acuvue Bifocal and the center-near multifocal lenses having more positive coefficients and the center-distance lenses having more negative coefficients.ConclusionWhen worn on eye, different commercially available lens types produce differences in the direction and magnitude of the peripheral refraction and spherical aberration profiles along different visual field meridians. This information may be relevant to refractive development and myopia control.

Dataset Information

Prediction model for best focus, power, and spherical aberration of the cornea: Raytracing on a large dataset of OCT data.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Prediction model for best focus, power, and spherical aberration of the cornea: Raytracing on a large dataset of OCT data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets