Specifying peripheral aberrations in visual science

Purpose: Investigations of foveal aberrations assume circular pupils. However, the pupil becomes increasingly elliptical with increase in visual field eccentricity. We address this and other issues concerning peripheral aberration specification. Methods: One approach uses an elliptical pupil similar to the actual pupil shape, stretched along its minor axis to become a circle so that Zernike circular aberration polynomials may be used. Another approach uses a circular pupil whose diameter matches either the larger or smaller dimension of the elliptical pupil. Pictorial presentation of aberrations, influence of wavelength on aberrations, sign differences between aberrations for fellow eyes, and referencing position to either the visual field or the retina are considered. Results: Examples show differences between the two approaches. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, but there are ways to compensate for most disadvantages. Two representations of data are pupil aberration maps at each position in the visual field and maps showing the variation in individual aberration coefficients across the field. Conclusions: Based on simplicity of use, adequacy of approximation, possible departures of off-axis pupils from ellipticity, and ease of understanding by clinicians, the circular pupil approach is preferable to the stretched elliptical approach for studies involving field angles up to 30 deg.

Peripheral refraction patterns out to large field angles

Purpose To investigate hyperopic shifts and the oblique (or 45-degree/135-degree) component of astigmatism at large angles in the horizontal visual field using the Hartmann-Shack technique. Methods The adult participants consisted of 6 hypermetropes, 13 emmetropes and 11 myopes. Measurements were made with a modified COAS-HD Hartmann-Shack aberrometer across T60 degrees along the horizontal visual field in 5-degree steps. Eyes were dilated with 1% cyclopentolate. Peripheral refraction was estimated as mean spherical (or spherical equivalent) refraction, with/against the rule of astigmatism and oblique astigmatism components, and as horizontal and vertical refraction components based on 3-mm major diameter elliptical pupils. Results Thirty percent of eyes showed a pattern that was a combination of type IV and type I patterns of Rempt et al. (Rempt F, Hoogerheide J, Hoogenboom WP. Peripheral retinoscopy and the skiagram. Ophthalmologica 1971;162:1Y10), which shows the characteristics of type IV (relative hypermetropia along the vertical meridian and relative myopia along the horizontal meridian) out to an angle of between 40 and 50 degrees before behaving like type I (both meridians show relative hypermetropia). We classified this pattern as type IV/I. Seven of 13 emmetropes had this pattern. As a group, there was no significant variation of the oblique component of astigmatism with angle, but about one-half of the eyes showed significant positive slopes (more positive or less negative values in the nasal field than in the temporal field) and one-fourth showed significant negative slopes. Conclusions It is often considered that a pattern of relative peripheral hypermetropia predisposes to the development of myopia. In this context, the finding of a considerable portion of emmetropes with the IV/I pattern suggests that it is unlikely that refraction at visual field angles beyond 40 degrees from fixation contributes to myopia development.

Visual performance with lenses correcting peripheral refractive errors

Purpose To design and manufacture lenses to correct peripheral refraction along the horizontal meridian and to determine whether these resulted in noticeable improvements in visual performance. Method Subjective refraction of a low myope was determined on the basis of best peripheral detection acuity along the horizontal visual field out to ±30° for both horizontal and vertical gratings. Subjective refraction was compared to objective refractions using a COAS-HD aberrometer. Special lenses were made to correct peripheral refraction, based on designs optimized with and without smoothing across a 3 mm diameter square aperture. Grating detection was retested with these lenses. Contrast thresholds of 1.25’ spots were determined across the field for the conditions of best correction, on-axis correction, and the special lenses. Results The participant had high relative peripheral hyperopia, particularly in the temporal visual field (maximum 2.9 D). There were differences > 0.5D between subjective and objective refractions at a few field angles. On-axis correction reduced peripheral detection acuity and increased peripheral contrast threshold in the peripheral visual field, relative to the best correction, by up to 0.4 and 0.5 log units, respectively. The special lenses restored most of the peripheral vision, although not all at angles to ±10°, and with the lens optimized with aperture-smoothing possibly giving better vision than the lens optimized without aperture-smoothing at some angles. Conclusion It is possible to design and manufacture lenses to give near optimum peripheral visual performance to at least ±30° along one visual field meridian. The benefit of such lenses is likely to be manifest only if a subject has a considerable relative peripheral refraction, for example of the order of 2 D.

Visual field coordinates of pupillary circular axis and optical axis

Purpose: We term the visual field position from which the pupil appears most nearly circular as the pupillary circular axis (PCAx). The aim was to determine and compare the horizontal and vertical co-ordinates of the PCAx and optical axis from pupil shape and refraction information for only the horizontal meridian of the visual field. Method: The PCAx was determined from the changes with visual field angle in the ellipticity and orientation of pupil images out to ±90° from fixation along the horizontal meridian for the right eyes of 30 people. This axis was compared with the optical axis determined from the changes in the astigmatic components of the refractions for field angles out to ±35° in the same meridian. Results: The mean estimated horizontal and vertical field coordinates of the PCAx were (‒5.3±1.9°, ‒3.2±1.5°) compared with (‒4.8±5.1°, ‒1.5±3.4°) for the optical axis. The vertical co-ordinates of the two axes were just significantly different (p =0.03) but there was no significant correlation between them. Only the horizontal coordinate of the PCAx was significantly related to the refraction in the group. Conclusion: On average, the PCAx is displaced from the line-of-sight by about the same angle as the optical axis but there is more inter-subject variation in the position of the optical axis. When modelling the optical performance of the eye, it appears reasonable to assume that the pupil is circular when viewed along the line-of-sight.

Do small-aperture presbyopic corrections influence the visual field?

Purpose To explore the effect of small-aperture optics, designed to aid presbyopes by increasing ocular depth-of-focus, on measurements of the visual field. Methods Simple theoretical and ray-tracing models were used to predict the impact of different designs of small-aperture contact lenses or corneal inlays on the proportion of light passing through natural pupils of various diameters as a function of the direction in the visual field. The left eyes of five healthy volunteers were tested using three afocal, hand-painted opaque soft contact lenses (www.davidthomas.com). Two were opaque over a 10 mm diameter but had central clear circular apertures of 1.5 and 3.0 mm in diameter. The third had an annular opaque zone with inner and outer diameters of 1.5 and 4.0 mm, approximately simulating the geometry of the KAMRA inlay (www.acufocus.com). A fourth, clear lens was used for comparison purposes. Visual fields along the horizontal meridian were evaluated up to 50° eccentricity with static automated perimetry (Medmont M700, stimulus Goldmann-size III; www.medmont.com). Results According to ray-tracing, the two lenses with the circular apertures were expected to reduce the relative transmittance of the pupil to zero at specific field angles (around 60° for the conditions of the experimental measurements). In contrast, the annular stop had no effect on the absolute field but relative transmittance was reduced over the central area of the field, the exact effects depending upon the natural pupil diameter. Experimental results broadly agreed with these theoretical expectations. With the 1.5 and 3.0 mm pupils, only minor losses in sensitivity (around 2 dB) in comparison with the clear-lens case occurred across the central 10° radius of field. Beyond this angle, sensitivity losses increased, to reach about 7 dB at the edge of the measured field (50°). The field results with the annular stop showed at most only a slight loss in sensitivity (≤3 dB) across the measured field. Conclusion The present theoretical and experimental results support earlier clinical findings that KAMRA-type annular stops, unlike circular artificial pupils, have only minor effects on measurements of the visual field.