Optomechanical eye model with imaging capabilities for objective evaluation of intraocular lenses

PURPOSE: To develop an in vitro procedure providing data on the visual performance obtainable with intraocular lenses (IOLs), for objective comparison between IOL models and direct correlation with the relative visual performance attainable in vivo. SETTING: University Hospital San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. METHODS: An optomechanical eye model was developed to allow simulated in vivo testing of IOLs. The experimental eye mimics the optics and geometry of the Gullstrand's eye model, with an aspheric poly(methyl methacrylate) cornea, variable pupil, and IOL holder. Its detection system is designed to reproduce the mean resolution of the human fovea. The imaging capabilities of the model eye were measured using monofocal IOLs. The tests included qualitative information, such as appearance of optotype chart images, and quantitative information, such as simulated visual acuity tests for far and near distance at variable contrasts. RESULTS: Objective numerical IOL evaluation was made possible on the basis of the visual acuity recorded with the eye model. The maximum recorded far acuity for the monofocal IOLs was about 20/14 at full contrast, progressively decreasing for reduced contrast. Best corrected near acuity ranged between 20/14.7 and 20/15.4. CONCLUSIONS: The optomechanical eye model provided objective grading of IOLs through the evaluation of simulated visual acuity, which can be scaled usefully to human vision. The eye model also allowed the qualitative visualization of IOL imaging properties, making it potentially useful in characterizing and distinguishing different IOL types.

[1]  E Peli,et al.  Appearance of images through a multifocal intraocular lens. , 2001, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[2]  Optical quality testing of monofocal intraocular lens implants with a 3 mm and a 4 mm aperture , 1991, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[3]  Michael F. Land,et al.  The Human Eye: Structure and Function , 1999, Nature Medicine.

[4]  D. Atchison,et al.  The eye and visual optical instruments: Frontmatter , 1997 .

[5]  Bruce P. Rosenthal,et al.  Functional assessment of low vision , 1996 .

[6]  Philip Lempert,et al.  Standards for Contrast Acuity/Sensitivity and Glare Testing , 1990 .

[7]  F. Ferris,et al.  New visual acuity charts for clinical research. , 1982, American journal of ophthalmology.

[8]  James P. C. Southall,et al.  Optical system of the eye. , 1924 .

[9]  H Liesenhoff,et al.  Comparison of the optical and visual quality of poly(methyl methacrylate) and silicone intraocular lenses , 1993, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[10]  J T Holladay,et al.  Optical performance of multifocal intraocular lenses , 1990, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[11]  Pier Giorgio Gobbi,et al.  Experimental characterization of the imaging properties of multifocal intraocular lenses , 2003, SPIE BiOS.

[12]  J. Holladay,et al.  Intraocular lens resolution in air and water , 1987, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[13]  R. Smythe,et al.  The Human Eye , 1975 .

[14]  F L Ferris,et al.  Relative letter and position difficulty on visual acuity charts from the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study. , 1993, American journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  Francesco Carones,et al.  Keratometric index, videokeratography, and refractive surgery , 1998, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[16]  M. Simpson,et al.  Optical quality of intraocular lenses , 1992, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[17]  J. Wolfe An Introduction to Contrast Sensitivity Testing , 1990 .

[18]  R. Chipman,et al.  Optical performance of an aspheric multifocal intraocular lens , 1991, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[19]  R. D. Watkins,et al.  THE OPTICAL SYSTEM OF THE EYE , 1970 .

[20]  Denis G. Pelli,et al.  THE DESIGN OF A NEW LETTER CHART FOR MEASURING CONTRAST SENSITIVITY , 1988 .

[21]  Arthur P. Ginsburg,et al.  Spatial filtering and visual form perception. , 1986 .

[22]  Valdemar Portney,et al.  Determining the imaging quality of intraocular lenses , 1998, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[23]  Markus Sticker,et al.  Quantitative performance of bifocal and multifocal intraocular lenses in a model eye: point spread function in multifocal intraocular lenses. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[24]  W Williamson,et al.  Compared optical performances of multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (contrast sensitivity and dynamic visual acuity) , 1994, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[25]  A Lang,et al.  Interpreting multifocal intraocular lens modulation transfer functions , 1993, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[26]  David W. Miller,et al.  Glare and Contrast Sensitivity for Clinicians , 1990, Springer New York.

[27]  L W Grossman,et al.  Survey of the optical quality of intraocular lens implants , 1991, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[28]  M. Knorz,et al.  Effect of pupil size and astigmatism on contrast acuity with monofocal and bifocal intraocular lenses , 1994, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[29]  Thomas W. Raasch,et al.  The Eye and Visual Optical Instruments , 1998 .

[30]  L W Grossman,et al.  Resolution testing of intraocular lenses , 1991, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[31]  V Portney Optical testing and inspection methodology for modern intraocular lenses , 1992, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[32]  Paolo Sirotti,et al.  Analysis of the optical quality of intraocular lenses. , 2004, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[33]  G. Rubin RELIABILITY AND SENSITIVITY OF CLINICAL CONTRAST SENSITIVITY TESTS , 1988 .

[34]  W. PEDDIE,et al.  Helmholtz's Treatise on Physiological Optics , 1926, Nature.