OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

| OPTICS, IMAGE SCIENCE, AND VISION

  • Editor: Franco Gori
  • Vol. 29, Iss. 8 — Aug. 1, 2012
  • pp: 1482–1488

Influence of Stiles–Crawford effect on visual performance after laser in situ keratomileusis

Lihua Fang, Yan Wang, and Fengying Chen  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 29, Issue 8, pp. 1482-1488 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.29.001482


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (278 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We evaluated the impact of the Stiles–Crawford effect (SCE) on visual performance following laser in situ keratomileusis procedures. This prospective study included 71 eyes of 36 consecutive myopic patients (mean age, 20.94±3.69 years). Ocular aberrations and contrast sensitivity were measured one month after surgery. The SCE was modeled optically as a filter placed in front of the eye, and then the modulation transfer functions (MTFs) and the predicted log contrast sensitivity were calculated from the measured wavefront aberration data. Then the visual Strehl ratio for MTF (VSMTF) was calculated. The results indicated that the computed MTF with SCE were superior to that without SCE. The predicted contrast sensitivity functions were underestimated about 20% when the SCE was not taken into account for the scotopic pupil. Moreover, the measured contrast sensitivity was not significantly different from that with SCE at 6, 12, and 18cycles/deg spatial frequencies. According to the obtained VSMTF ratio, optical qualities of all eyes were underestimated with the range from 5% (0.02 log unit) to 65% (0.22 log unit) without SCE, and the average value is 41% (0.15 log unit). When only taking higher-order aberrations into account, the predicted postoperative visual performance would be different from the real values. The evaluation of postoperative visual performance from wavefront aberrations should consider not only the compensation relationship between defocus and spherical aberration but also the SCE.

© 2012 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(330.1800) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision - contrast sensitivity
(330.7335) Vision, color, and visual optics : Visual optics, refractive surgery

ToC Category:
Vision, Color, and Visual Optics

History
Original Manuscript: March 19, 2012
Revised Manuscript: May 6, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: May 31, 2012
Published: July 9, 2012

Virtual Issues
Vol. 7, Iss. 10 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Lihua Fang, Yan Wang, and Fengying Chen, "Influence of Stiles–Crawford effect on visual performance after laser in situ keratomileusis," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 29, 1482-1488 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-29-8-1482


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. Y. Wang, K. X. Zhao, J. C. He, Y. Jin, and T. Zuo, “Ocular higher-order aberrations features analysis after corneal refractive surgery,” Chinese Med. J. 120, 269–273 (2007).
  2. M. Mrochen, M. Kaemmerer, P. Mierdel, and T. Seiler, “Increased higher-order optical aberrations after laser refractive surgery: a problem of subclinical decentration,” J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 27, 362–369 (2001). [CrossRef]
  3. K. Pesudovs, “Wavefront aberration outcomes of LASIK for high myopia and high hyperopia,” J. Refract. Surg. 21, S508–512 (2005).
  4. N. Sakata, T. Tokunaga, K. Miyata, and T. Oshika, “Changes in contrast sensitivity function and ocular higher order aberration by conventional myopic photorefractive keratectomy,” Jpn. J. Ophthalmol. 51, 347–352 (2007). [CrossRef]
  5. C. Villa, R. Gutierrez, J. R. Jimenez, and J. M. Gonzalez-Meijome, “Night vision disturbances after successful LASIK surgery,” Brit. J. Ophthalmol. 91, 1031–1037 (2007). [CrossRef]
  6. K. M. Tuan, D. Chernyak, and S. T. Feldman, “Predicting patients’ night vision complaints with wavefront technology,” Am. J. Ophthalmol. 141, 1–6.e2 (2006). [CrossRef]
  7. E. Moreno-Barriuso, J. M. Lloves, S. Marcos, R. Navarro, L. Llorente, and S. Barbero, “Ocular aberrations before and after myopic corneal refractive surgery: LASIK-induced changes measured with laser ray tracing,” Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 42, 1396–1403 (2001).
  8. R. A. Applegate, H. C. Howland, R. P. Sharp, A. J. Cottingham, and R. W. Yee, “Corneal aberrations and visual performance after radial keratotomy,” J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 14, 397–407 (1998).
  9. D. Wigledowska-Promienska and I. Zawojska, “Changes in higher order aberrations after wavefront-guided PRK for correction of low to moderate myopia and myopic astigmatism: two-year follow-up,” Eur. J. Ophthalmol. 17, 507–514 (2007).
  10. S. Marcos and S. A. Burns, “Cone spacing and waveguide properties from cone directionality measurements,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 995–1004 (1999). [CrossRef]
  11. R. A. Applegate and V. Lakshminarayanan, “Parametric representation of Stiles–Crawford functions: normal variation of peak location and directionality,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10, 1611–1623 (1993). [CrossRef]
  12. D. A. Atchison, A. Joblin, and G. Smith, “Influence of Stiles–Crawford effect apodization on spatial visual performance,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15, 2545–2551 (1998). [CrossRef]
  13. D. A. Atchison, D. H. Scott, A. Joblin, and G. Smith, “Influence of Stiles–Crawford effect apodization on spatial visual performance with decentered pupils,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 18, 1201–1211 (2001). [CrossRef]
  14. D. A. Atchison, D. H. Scott, N. C. Strang, and P. Artal, “Influence of Stiles–Crawford apodization on visual acuity,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 1073–1083 (2002). [CrossRef]
  15. D. A. Atchison and D. H. Scott, “Contrast sensitivity and the Stiles–Crawford effect,” Vis. Res. 42, 1559–1569 (2002). [CrossRef]
  16. Y. Wang, K. Zhao, Y. Jin, Y. Niu, and T. Zuo, “Changes of higher order aberration with various pupil sizes in the myopic eye,” J. Refract. Surg. 19, S270–274 (2003).
  17. L. N. Thibos, X. Hong, A. Bradley, and R. A. Applegate, “Accuracy and precision of objective refraction from wavefront aberrations,” J. Vision 4, 329–351 (2004). [CrossRef]
  18. X. Cheng, A. Bradley, and L. N. Thibos, “Predicting subjective judgment of best focus with objective image quality metrics,” J. Vision 4, 310–321 (2004). [CrossRef]
  19. J. D. Marsack, L. N. Thibos, and R. A. Applegate, “Metrics of optical quality derived from wave aberrations predict visual performance,” J. Vision 4, 322–328 (2004). [CrossRef]
  20. R. A. Applegate, J. D. Marsack, R. Ramos, and E. J. Sarver, “Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance,” J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 29, 1487–1495(2003). [CrossRef]
  21. J. Liang, B. Grimm, S. Goelz, and J. F. Bille, “Objective measurement of wave aberrations of the human eye with the use of a Hartmann-Shack wave-front sensor,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 1949–1957 (1994). [CrossRef]
  22. L.-h. Fang, X. He, and S. Li, “Study on the counterbalanced relationship between defocus and spherical aberration based on optical quality metrics of human eyes,” Acta Photon. Sin. 39, 110–115 (2010). [CrossRef]
  23. Organization-for-Standardization-International-(ISO), “Ophthalmic Optics and Instruments—Reporting Aberrations of the Human Eye” (ISO, 2008).
  24. J. P. Carroll, “Apodization model of the Stiles–Crawford effect,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70, 1155–1156 (1980). [CrossRef]
  25. X. Zhang, M. Ye, A. Bradley, and L. Thibos, “Apodization by the Stiles–Crawford effect moderates the visual impact of retinal image defocus,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 16, 812–820(1999). [CrossRef]
  26. G. N. Pomerance and D. W. Evans, “Test-retest reliability of the CSV-1000 contrast test and its relationship to glaucoma therapy,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 35, 3357–3361 (1994).
  27. F. W. Campbell and D. G. Green, “Optical and retinal factors affecting visual resolution,” J. Physiol. 181, 576–593 (1965).
  28. J. J. Perez-Santonja, H. F. Sakla, and J. L. Alio, “Contrast sensitivity after laser in situ keratomileusis,” J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 24, 183–189 (1998).
  29. J. T. Holladay, D. R. Dudeja, and J. Chang, “Functional vision and corneal changes after laser in situ keratomileusis determined by contrast sensitivity, glare testing, and corneal topography,” J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 25, 663–669 (1999). [CrossRef]
  30. L. N. Thibos, X. Hong, A. Bradley, and X. Cheng, “Statistical variation of aberration structure and image quality in a normal population of healthy eyes,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 2329–2348 (2002). [CrossRef]
  31. A. Guirao, J. Porter, D. R. Williams, and I. G. Cox, “Calculated impact of higher-order monochromatic aberrations on retinal image quality in a population of human eyes,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 620–628 (2002). [CrossRef]
  32. R. Montes-Mico and W. N. Charman, “Choice of spatial frequency for contrast sensitivity evaluation after corneal refractive surgery,” J. Refract. Surg. 17, 646–651 (2001).
  33. Y. Wang, K. X. Zhao, F. Rao, X. Y. Yang, J. Hou, and Z. Q. Wang, “Visual quality evaluation on changes of MTF and wavefront aberration after laser in situ keratomileusis,” Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi 45, 580–586 (2009).
  34. S. Marcos, “Aberrations and visual performance following standard laser vision correction,” J. Refract. Surg. 17, S596–601 (2001).
  35. T. Hiraoka, C. Okamoto, Y. Ishii, T. Kakita, and T. Oshika, “Contrast sensitivity function and ocular higher-order aberrations following overnight orthokeratology,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 48, 550–556 (2007). [CrossRef]
  36. B. Vohnsen, I. Iglesias, and P. Artal, “Guided light and diffraction model of human-eye photoreceptors,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22, 2318–2328 (2005). [CrossRef]
  37. B. Vohnsen, “Photoreceptor waveguides and effective retinal image quality,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24, 597–607 (2007). [CrossRef]
  38. M. Kilintari, A. Pallikaris, N. Tsiklis, and H. S. Ginis, “Evaluation of image quality metrics for the prediction of subjective best focus,” Optom. Vis. Sci. (2010). [CrossRef]
  39. D. A. Atchison, S. Marcos, and D. H. Scott, “The influence of the Stiles–Crawford peak location on visual performance,” Vis. Res. 43, 659–668 (2003). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited