OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Michael Duncan
  • Vol. 14, Iss. 23 — Nov. 13, 2006
  • pp: 11477–11485
« Show journal navigation

Simulation of keratoconus observation in photorefraction

Ying-Ling Chen, B. Tan, K. Baker, J. W. L. Lewis, T. Swartz, Y. Jiang, and M. Wang  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 14, Issue 23, pp. 11477-11485 (2006)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.14.011477


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (763 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

In the recent years, keratoconus (KC) has increasingly gained attention due to its treatment options and to the popularity of keratorefractive surgery. This paper investigates the potential of identification of KC using photorefraction (PR), an optical technique that is similar to objective retinoscopy and is commonly used for large-scale ocular screening. Using personalized eye models of both KC and pre-LASIK patients, computer simulations were performed to achieve visualization of this ophthalmic measurement. The simulations are validated by comparing results to two sets of experimental measurements. These PR images show distinguishable differences between KC eyes and eyes that are either normal or ametropic. The simulation technique with personalized modeling can be extended to other ophthalmic instrument developments. It makes possible investigation with the least number of real human subjects. The application is also of great interest in medical training.

© 2006 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Around the world, experienced physicians are aware of the irregular reflex appearances from high-order ocular aberration, including KC, that are observed using hand-held retinoscopes [1–3

1. E. H. Roth, H. Ludwig, F. Schmitz, and W. Werner, “Retinoscopy. A multi-media teaching program on CD,” Ophthalmologe. 98, 964–967 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Prior to computerized testing methods such as autorefraction, the retinoscope was the main method for objective measurement of refractive error and identification of irregular astigmatism. Although a retinoscope is a low-cost, simple optical device, the retinal reflex integrates ocular information through all optical elements similar to that of a wavefront aberrometer. Shortcomings of the current retinoscope include the broad-spectrum of the light source that integrates chromatic aberration in the measurement and the visible irradiation that stimulates pupil response and hence, in a non-mydriatic examination, reduces the examined pupillary area. Furthermore, retinoscopic observations cannot be stored in digital form for discussion and sharing. Because photorefraction (PR) shares similar optical features with retinoscopy [4

4. H. Howland, “Optics of photoretinoscopy: results from ray tracing,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 621–625 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

5. W. Bobier, “Eccentric photorefraction: Optical analysis and empirical measures,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 614–620 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], it inherits the capability of detecting irregular aberration but without the shortcomings of the retinoscope. The objective of this paper is to visualize aberration from an irregular cornea using computer simulation of PR. To do so, personalized schematic eye models were constructed from the measured clinic data of five eyes with keratoconus and 8 ametropic eyes.

Detailed optical eye modeling is possible when the measured corneal topography, wavefront aberration, and biometric data are accessible [6

6. R. Navarro, L. Gonzalez, and J. L. Hernandez-Matamoros, “On the prediction of optical aberrations by personalized eye models,” Optom. Vis. Sci. 83, 371–381 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. These models can assist ocular surgical planning [7–9

7. C. Winkler von Mohrenfels, A. Huber, B. Gabler, W. Herrmann, A. Kempe, C. Donitzky, and C. P. Lohmann, “Wavefront-guided laser epithelial keratomileusis with the wavelight concept system 500,” J. Refract. Surg. 20, S565–569 (2004).

], and in designing of personalized intraocular lens, spectacles, and contact lens. [10–12

10. J. B. Almeida and A. M. Garcia, “Theoretical calculation of a contact lens thickness designed to correct the eye’s monochromatic aberrations,” Optom. Vis. Sci. 82, 59–63 (2005). [PubMed]

]. Here, we utilize personalized modeling in computer simulations to predict clinical measurements. To validate the simulation result, the results were compared to experimental measurements of equivalent optical conditions. Validated ophthalmic simulations with personalized eye models make it possible to investigate accurately the instrument sensitivity using the clinic database without additional testing on real patients.

2. Photorefraction simulation

To investigate keratoconus detection using the PR technique, optical schematic eye models of individuals were constructed using ZemaxTM optical software (ZEMAX Development Corporation, Bellevue, WA, USA). The average optical parameters of human eyes were adopted from a wide-angle emmetropic eye model [13

13. R. Navarro, J. Santamaria, and J. Bescos, “Accommodation-dependent model of the human eye with aspherics,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1273–1281 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Existing clinical data including the corneal topography and refraction prescription of five eyes with keratoconus and eight ametropic eyes were used for the individual eye modeling.

Keratonconus is a corneal disease where the cornea becomes thin and cannot sustain a normal shape. The corneal surface becomes distorted and irregularly shaped, leading to a loss of best corrected vision. Retinoscopy reveals a ‘scissor-reflex’ in these eyes of varying degrees. Scarring, straie (or folds) of the back surface of the cornea, and bullous keratopathy (bubbles of swelling in the cornea) may occur as the disease progresses and these can also be seen in the retinal reflex. Diagnosis is typically based on the clinical picture. In mild cases, the topographical map is irregular but the patient has no other clinical signs. In moderate cases, the patient may suffer loss of best corrected vision, show more astigmatism on topography, and have a thinned cornea based on ultrasound measurement. In severe cases, the best corrected vision is severely reduced, topography is highly irregular when obtainable, and the cornea may show signs of scarring, swelling, and/or stria.

For this study, clinical measurements for five patients with mild-to-moderate keratoconus were obtained. The anterior surface of the base eye model [13

13. R. Navarro, J. Santamaria, and J. Bescos, “Accommodation-dependent model of the human eye with aspherics,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1273–1281 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] was replaced with the elevation map of corneal topography from a Humphrey Atlas system. After the corneal topography was measured and saved, the elevation files were exported using the external interface of the Humphrey MasterVue topography system. The elevation files were then used by a Matlab program to determine the missing corneal surface. The missing interior corneal surface elevation data was linear interpolated based on Delaunay triangulation techniques. The missing peripheral data was linearly extrapolated horizontally, vertically, and diagonally to neighboring nodes. The reconstructed corneal elevation results were then used by Zemax to reproduce the corneal surface for optical eye modeling. After the replacement of cornea surface, the individual model was modified to approach the refraction as found in the clinical record by manifest refraction. The aperture stop was set to 3 mm diameter (pupil about 3.4 mm) and the wavelength at 555 nm. The vitreous length was set to be a variable for iteration to produce the patients’ prescribed spherical equivalent refraction (SE). Minimization of RMS wavefront error was used as the merit function in the ZEMAX optimization.

After this optimization, the models’ SE were equivalent to the patients’ clinical data. The five normal myopic eyes (average spherical equivalence =-5.15 diopters) had an average axial length of 26.0 mm, three normal hyperopic patients (average spherical equivalence =+1.8 diopters) had an average axial length of 23.7 mm, and the 5 KC patients (all myopic with an average spherical equivalence =-3.5 diopters) had an average axial length of 24.6 mm. The average length for emmtropic eyes is 24 mm.

Photorefraction simulation was performed with the camera focal plane located at the plane of the anterior cornea. A shorter-than-typical working distance of 30 cm between camera and the subject was used to obtain better spatial resolution, and a larger-than-normal camera entrance pupil of 18 mm was used to provide more dynamic range of the reflex signal. At same working distance of the camera entrance pupil, thirteen 5-mm-diameter Lambertian light sources of 800nm wavelength were located coaxially and at three eccentricities of 6.5, 9.0, and 11.5 mm (measured from the center of camera pupil to the center of each of the four light source) in the 4 directions of up, down, left, and right.

Fig. 1. PR simulation results (left) and measured and filled corneal topographies (upper and lower right) of model eyes from 5 KC patients. The lower (blue) to upper (red) scales in each color bar of the 5 KC topographies are -14 to +80 µm, -40 to 100 µm, 180 to 380 µm, -20 to 120 µm, and -20 to 140 µm respectively. KC_5 simulation was performed for eccentricities of 0 (coaxial), 6.5, 9 (knife-edge), and 11.5 mm. Camera entrance pupil is 18 mm as indicated with red dashed lines.

Other than the larger pupil coverage and sharper intensity variation, infrared photorefraction is similar to spot retinoscopy. The photorefraction result shows that the small gazing angles and the angle (kappa) between the visual and pupillary axes cause only a slight shift in the PR reflex images. The thirteen simulation results with eyes looking straight forward are shown in Figs 1, 2, and 3. On the right side of each set of simulations in the three figures are the clinically measured and, for comparison, the computer inter- and extrapolated corneal topography. A floating best-fit sphere was subtracted from the raw elevation data to emphasize the detailed corneal structures. The circular dashed lines on the topographies indicate the reference pupil boundaries of PR calculations. Also shown on the top left of each set of results are the refraction prescription and the after-correction RMS wavefront error of the eye model.

Fig. 2. Corneal topographies (right) and PR simulation results (left) of 4 myopic eyes. The lower (blue) to upper (red) scales in each color bar of the 4 myopic topographies are -10 to +40 µm, -10 to 30 µm, -10 to 50 µm, and -20 to 70 µm respectively.
Fig. 3. Corneal topography (right) and PR simulation results of a mild myopia and 3 hyperopic eyes. The lower (blue) to upper (red) scales in each color bar of the 4 topographies are 0 to 70 µm, 0 to 40 µm, 0 to 50 µm, and -5 to 15 µm respectively.

Figure 1 shows the predicted observations of the five KC eyes. These images show irregular intensity distributions across the pupil areas. The expected four knife-edge eccentric images show the most distinguished intensity variation in the reflex observation (illustrated in the KC_5 simulation). One common observation in the five KC eyes is the bright spot which appears near the cone when illumination is from the upper eccentricity of the camera. These brighter spots represent the convergent reflex distributions caused by the lower-located KC cones. When illuminated from the lower eccentric location, a shadow appears approximately at the cone location, which demonstrates the divergent reflex from the cone. Similar to the up and down illumination, the left and right PR images in the knife-edge setting also show the bright-dark reversed images. The coaxial PR images are not sensitive in detecting the irregular corneal conditions.

Among these KC cases, KC_1 has the mildest condition, where the cone is not clearly shown on topography. The protruding ridge is about 20 µm high. The corneal cylinder is 1.25 diopter, and the after-correction aberration of 0.153 µm is not significantly larger than that of typical ammetropic eyes, such as AS_2 in Fig. 2. Although the intensity contrasts in the eccentric pupil reflexes are not as crisp as other KC cases, the common KC shadow and bright spot appearance is clearly shown, and the typical PR observation of corner crescents for ammetropic eyes are not present.

For the 30 cm working distance in this simulation, the PR center of the dark zone (or the neutralization refraction) is -3.3 diopter [4

4. H. Howland, “Optics of photoretinoscopy: results from ray tracing,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 621–625 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

5. W. Bobier, “Eccentric photorefraction: Optical analysis and empirical measures,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 614–620 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 15

15. I. J. Hodgkinson, K. M. Chong, and A. C. B. Molteno, “Photorefraction of the living eye: a model for linear knife edge photoscreening,” Appl. Opt. 30, 2263–2269 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Figure 2 shows simulation results of four higher myopic eyes (>3.3 diopter) with and without significant astigmatism. The retinal reflexes clearly show the bright crescent in the corresponding directions of illumination, which is a common high myopic appearance in PR measurement. Notice that the two astigmatic eyes AS_1 and AS_2 have cylinder magnitudes similar to KC_1. The topographies of these two eyes also have similar appearances of KC_1. However, the shadow and bright spot typical to KC are not observed in these two eyes. Also noticeable is the slightly rippled reflex distribution on AS_2. This is a result from the larger high-order aberration of 0.132 µm.

The simulation result of the mild myopia, MY_1 (<3.3 diopter), and the hyperopic cases, HY_1, HY_2, and AS_3, are shown in Fig. 3. Since there is neither accommodation assumed nor the compensation 3.3-diopter trial lens included in the simulation, the retinal reflex crescents of these four eyes appear in the opposite direction of the illumination as expected with typical geometric PR analysis [5

5. W. Bobier, “Eccentric photorefraction: Optical analysis and empirical measures,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 614–620 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. It is also noted that the results of MY_1 exhibit a more rippled reflex due to the high-order aberrations of this eye.

3. Validation and conclusion

To validate the simulations, photorefraction measurements were performed on one KC eye (KC_5) and one myopic eye (MY_3), each of which can be described as a moderate abnormality. The experiment used five infrared 5-mm-diameter pulsed LEDs (wavelength 805±30 nm) for illumination, a pellicle beam splitter, and a digital camera with a lens entrance pupil of 18 mm. The distance from both camera entrance pupil and light sources, through the beam splitter, to the examined eyes were 30 cm. The eccentricities and positions of LEDs were the same as described in the simulation work. The eye images were acquired in the darkened laboratory so that the pupils were naturally dilated.

Figure 4 shows the measured PR images from the KC eye (KC_5) and the myopic eye (MY_3). The pupil areas in these images were cropped for presentation. The images are nearly identical to the simulated data in Figs. 1 and 2 but for the lower contrast and more details in the measured photographs. One reason for this contrast difference is the presence of multiple intraocular scattering that is not included in the optical computation. Because of the differences in melanin density in pigment epithelium, Caucasians exhibit more pronounced retinal reflex in retinoscope, ophthalmoscope, and PR measurements and common photographs than do Asians and blacks [16

16. J. J. Weiter, F. C. Delori, G. L. Wing, and K. A. Fitch, “Retinal pigment epithelium lipofuscin and melanin and choroidal melanin in human eyes,” Invest. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci. 27, 145–152 (1986).

, 17

17. F. C. Delori and K. P. Pflibsen, “Spectral reflectance of human ocular fundus,” Appl. Opt. 28, 1061–1077 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Detailed differences between simulation and measurement may be attributed to intraocular factors such as the posterior cornea and the lens that are also not included in the simulation.

Fig. 4. Experiment measured PR images from KC_5 (compared to simulation result in Fig. 1) and MY_3 eyes (compared to simulated images in Fig. 2). Near the center of the pupil in each image is the cornea reflection.

In this study, individualized eye models were determined from clinical measurements of refractive error and corneal topographies of subjects with mild-to-moderate degrees of myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism and KC. The 3-variable lens construct provided excellent agreement between the eye model prediction and the clinical measurements. Using the eye models, predictions were obtained for the simulated measurement results of a photorefractive instrument. These results indicated that the PR design exhibited the ability to detect such cases of KC. Moreover, because of the differences in the optical aberrations, the PR design was able to differentiate these KC measurements from not only hyperopic eyes but also from eyes characterized by degrees of simple myopia and astigmatism that are characteristic in the progression of KC. Further investigation using more mild degrees of KC patients’ data that include both the anterior and posterior corneal surfaces would determine the sensitivity of this photorefractive technique in the identification of keratoconus. The enhancement of optical design to increase detection sensitivity through this technique is promising. University of Tennessee/Knoxville Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for the methods and practices of this study.

Acknowledgments

This study was partially supported by ARMY TATRC Grant W81XWH-05-1-0409.

References and links

1.

E. H. Roth, H. Ludwig, F. Schmitz, and W. Werner, “Retinoscopy. A multi-media teaching program on CD,” Ophthalmologe. 98, 964–967 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

I. Chopra and A. K. Jain, “Between eye asymmetry in keratoconus in an Indian population,” Clin. Exp. Optom. 88, 146–152 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

J. Kim and M. V. Netto, “Keratoconus associated with hyperimmunoglobulin E syndrome,” Cornea. 23, 93–96 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

H. Howland, “Optics of photoretinoscopy: results from ray tracing,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 621–625 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

W. Bobier, “Eccentric photorefraction: Optical analysis and empirical measures,” Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 614–620 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

R. Navarro, L. Gonzalez, and J. L. Hernandez-Matamoros, “On the prediction of optical aberrations by personalized eye models,” Optom. Vis. Sci. 83, 371–381 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

C. Winkler von Mohrenfels, A. Huber, B. Gabler, W. Herrmann, A. Kempe, C. Donitzky, and C. P. Lohmann, “Wavefront-guided laser epithelial keratomileusis with the wavelight concept system 500,” J. Refract. Surg. 20, S565–569 (2004).

8.

J. Castanera, A. Serra, and C. Rios, “Wavefront-guided ablation with Bausch and Lomb Zyoptix for retreatments after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia,” J. Refract. Surg. 20, 439–443 (2004). [PubMed]

9.

D. Y. Lin and E. E. Manche, “Custom-contoured ablation pattern method for the treatment of decentered laser ablations. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 30, 1675–1684 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

J. B. Almeida and A. M. Garcia, “Theoretical calculation of a contact lens thickness designed to correct the eye’s monochromatic aberrations,” Optom. Vis. Sci. 82, 59–63 (2005). [PubMed]

11.

J. Marsack, T. Milner, G. Rylander, N. Leach, and A. Roorda, “Applying wavefront sensors and corneal topography to keratoconus,” Biomed. Sci. Instrum. 38, 471–476 (2002). [PubMed]

12.

W. N. Charman, “Wavefront technology: past, present and future,” Cont. Lens Anterior Eye 28, 75–92. Epub 2005 Apr 26. Review (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13.

R. Navarro, J. Santamaria, and J. Bescos, “Accommodation-dependent model of the human eye with aspherics,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1273–1281 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

T. O. Salmon and C. van de Pol, “Zernike coefficient norms - comparison of studies,” presented at the American Academy of Optometry annual meeting, Tampa, Florida, 9 December, 2004.

15.

I. J. Hodgkinson, K. M. Chong, and A. C. B. Molteno, “Photorefraction of the living eye: a model for linear knife edge photoscreening,” Appl. Opt. 30, 2263–2269 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

J. J. Weiter, F. C. Delori, G. L. Wing, and K. A. Fitch, “Retinal pigment epithelium lipofuscin and melanin and choroidal melanin in human eyes,” Invest. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci. 27, 145–152 (1986).

17.

F. C. Delori and K. P. Pflibsen, “Spectral reflectance of human ocular fundus,” Appl. Opt. 28, 1061–1077 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(170.4460) Medical optics and biotechnology : Ophthalmic optics and devices
(170.4580) Medical optics and biotechnology : Optical diagnostics for medicine
(330.4060) Vision, color, and visual optics : Vision modeling
(330.4460) Vision, color, and visual optics : Ophthalmic optics and devices

ToC Category:
Vision and color

History
Original Manuscript: September 11, 2006
Revised Manuscript: October 26, 2006
Manuscript Accepted: October 30, 2006
Published: November 13, 2006

Virtual Issues
Vol. 1, Iss. 12 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Ying-Ling Chen, B. Tan, K. Baker, J. W. L. Lewis, T. Swartz, Y. Jiang, and M. Wang, "Simulation of keratoconus observation in photorefraction," Opt. Express 14, 11477-11485 (2006)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-14-23-11477


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. E. H. Roth, H. Ludwig, F. Schmitz, and W. Werner, "Retinoscopy. A multi-media teaching program on CD," Ophthalmologe. 98, 964-967 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. I. Chopra, and A. K. Jain, "Between eye asymmetry in keratoconus in an Indian population," Clin. Exp. Optom. 88, 146-152 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. J. Kim, and M. V. Netto, "Keratoconus associated with hyperimmunoglobulin E syndrome," Cornea. 23, 93-96 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. H. Howland, "Optics of photoretinoscopy: results from ray tracing," Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 621-625 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. W. Bobier, "Eccentric photorefraction: Optical analysis and empirical measures," Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 62, 614-620 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. R. Navarro, L. Gonzalez, and J. L. Hernandez-Matamoros, "On the prediction of optical aberrations by personalized eye models," Optom. Vis. Sci. 83, 371-381 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. C. Winkler von Mohrenfels, A. Huber, B. Gabler, W. Herrmann, A. Kempe, C. Donitzky, and C..P. Lohmann, "Wavefront-guided laser epithelial keratomileusis with the wavelight concept system 500," J. Refract. Surg. 20, S565-569 (2004).
  8. J. Castanera, A. Serra, and C. Rios, "Wavefront-guided ablation with Bausch and Lomb Zyoptix for retreatments after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia," J. Refract. Surg. 20, 439-443 (2004). [PubMed]
  9. D. Y. Lin, and E. E. Manche, "Custom-contoured ablation pattern method for the treatment of decentered laser ablations," J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 30, 1675-1684 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. J. B. Almeida, and A. M. Garcia, "Theoretical calculation of a contact lens thickness designed to correct the eye's monochromatic aberrations," Optom. Vis. Sci. 82, 59-63 (2005). [PubMed]
  11. J. Marsack, T. Milner, G. Rylander, N. Leach, and A. Roorda, "Applying wavefront sensors and corneal topography to keratoconus," Biomed. Sci. Instrum. 38, 471-476 (2002). [PubMed]
  12. W. N. Charman, "Wavefront technology: past, present and future," Cont. Lens Anterior Eye 28, 75-92. Epub 2005 Apr 26. Review (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. R. Navarro, J. Santamaria, and J. Bescos, "Accommodation-dependent model of the human eye with aspherics," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 1273-1281 (1985). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. T. O. Salmon, and C. van de Pol, "Zernike coefficient norms - comparison of studies," presented at the American Academy of Optometry annual meeting, Tampa, Florida, 9 December, 2004.
  15. I. J. Hodgkinson, K. M. Chong, and A. C. B. Molteno, "Photorefraction of the living eye: a model for linear knife edge photoscreening," Appl. Opt. 30, 2263-2269 (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. J. J. Weiter, F. C. Delori, G. L. Wing, and K. A. Fitch, "Retinal pigment epithelium lipofuscin and melanin and choroidal melanin in human eyes," Invest. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci. 27, 145-52 (1986)
  17. F. C. Delori and K. P. Pflibsen, "Spectral reflectance of human ocular fundus," Appl. Opt. 28, 1061-77 (1989) [CrossRef] [PubMed]

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.

Figures

Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Fig. 3.
 
Fig. 4.
 

« Previous Article

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited