Spherical aberration and higher order aberrations with Balafilcon A (PureVision) and Comfilcon A (Biofinity)

  • Colm McAlinden
  • Jonathan E. Moore
  • Victoria E. McGilligan
  • Tara C. B. Moore
Miscellaneous

Abstract

Background

Advances in the optical design of soft contact lenses have seen certain manufacturers incorporate aspheric optics into soft lenses in an attempt to reduce spherical aberration, to provide superior visual performance. The aim of this study is to determine the on-eye differences in spherical aberration and higher order aberrations (HOA) between the Bausch and Lomb PureVision (Balafilcon A) and the CooperVision Biofinity (Comfilcon A).

Methods

Twenty subjects were recruited in a prospective, randomized, unilateral study. The right eye was dilated and HOA measured with the NIDEK OPD-Scan. Each eye was fitted randomly with a −3.00D PureVision and a −3.00D Biofinity, and HOA were measured with lenses in situ across a 6 mm pupil. Paired t-tests were performed to determine HOA differences with the lenses in situ compared to baseline.

Results

Aberrometry was successfully performed on all subjects. Statistical analysis indicated no changes in spherical aberration, but changes in other HOA. With the PureVision, there were increases in Zernike terms Z 3 1 (from 0.01 μm to −0.11 μm), Z 4 -2 (from 0.01 μm to 0.13 μm) and Z 5 -1 (from −0.01 μm to 0.03 μm). With the Biofinity there was an increase in Zernike term Z 3 3 (from 0.00 μm to 0.09 μm).

Conclusions

No statistically significant changes occurred in spherical aberration. The PureVision caused statistically significant increases in Z 3 1 , Z 4 -2 and Z 5 -1 , and the Biofinity caused an increase in Z 3 3 . Clinically significant changes (>0.1 μm) occurred with terms Z 3 1 and Z 4 -2 with the PureVision only.

Keywords

Higher order aberrations Aspheric Wavefront Aberrometry Balafilcon A PureVision Comfilcon A Biofinity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Professor Edward Goodall, Department of Statistics and Operational Research, School of Mathematics and Physics, The Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK for his statistical advice in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Rabbetts RB (2002) Clinical visual optics, 3rd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Edinburgh, pp 281–285Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Walsh G, Charman WN (1985) Measurement of the wavefront aberration of the human eye. Ophthal Physiol Opt 5:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Howland HC, Howland B (1977) A subjective method for the measurement of monochromatic aberrations of the eye. J Opt Soc Am A 67:1508–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liang J, Williams DR (1997) Aberrations and retinal image quality of the normal human eye. J Opt Soc Am A 14:2873–2883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bao J, Le R, Wu J, Shen Y, Lu F, He JC (2009) Higher-order wavefront aberration for populations of young emmetropes and myopes. J Optom 2:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thibos LN, Applegate RA, Schwiegerling IT, Webb R (2002) Standards for reporting the optical aberrations of eyes. J Refract Surg 18:S652–S660PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Efron S, Efron N, Morgan PB (2008) Optical and visual performance of aspheric soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 85:201–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dietze HH, Cox MJ (2003) On- and off-eye spherical aberration of soft contact lenses and consequent changes of effective lens power. Optom Vis Sci 80:126–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dietez HH, Cox MJ (2004) Correcting ocular spherical aberration with soft contact lenses. J Opt Soc Am A 21:473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lehr R (1992) Sixteen s squared over d squared: a relation for crude sample size estimates. Stat Med 11:1099–1102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goodall EA, Moore JE, Moore T (2009) The estimation of approximate sample size requirements necessary for clinical and epidemiological studies in vision sciences. Eye 23:1589–1597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buscemi PM (2004) Retinoscope double pass aberrometry: principles and application of the NIDEK OPD-Scan. In: Kruegar RR, Applegate RA, MacRae SM (eds) Wavefront customized visual correction: the quest for supervision. Slack, Thorofare, NJ, pp 149–153Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ANSI American National Standards (2004) American National Standard for Ophthalmics-methods for reporting optical aberrations of eyes. ANSI Z80.28Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    López-Gil N, Castejón-Mochón JF, Benito A, Marín JM, Lo-a-Foe G, Marin G, Fermigier B, Renard D, Joyeux D, Château N, Artal P (2002) Aberration generation by contact lenses with aspheric and asymmetric surfaces. J Refract Surg 18:S603–S609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Albarran C, Pons AM, Lorente A, Montés R, Artigas J (1997) Influence of the tear film on the optical quality of the eye. Contact Lens Ant Eye 20:129–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tutt R, Bradley A, Begley C, Thibos LN (2000) Optical and visual impact of tear break-up in human eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41:4117–4123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rae SM, Price HC (2009) The effect of soft contact lens wear and time from blink on wavefront aberration measurement variation. Clin Exp Optom 92:274–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McAlinden C, Moore JE (2010) Higher order aberrations using the NIDEK OPD-Scan and the AMO WaveScan. J Refract Surg 28:1–4 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rozema JJ, Van Dyck DE, Tassignon MJ (2006) Clinical comparison of 6 aberrometers. Part 2: statistical comparison in a test group. J Cataract Refract Surg 32(1):33–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holzer MP, Goebels S, Auffarth GU (2006) Precision of NIDEK OPD-scan measurements. J Refract Surg 22(9 Suppl):S1021–S1023PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roberts B, Athappilly G, Tinio B, Naikoo H, Asbell P (2006) Higher order aberrations induced by soft contact lenses in normal eyes with myopia. Eye Contact Lens 32:138–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lu F, Mao X, Qu J, Xu D, He JC (2003) Monochromatic wavefront aberrations in the human eye with contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 80:135–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Awwad ST, Sanchez P, Sanchez A, McCulley JP, Cavanagh HD (2008) A preliminary in vivo assessment of higher-order aberrations induced by a silicone hydrogel monofocal contact lens. Eye Contact Lens 34:2–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hiraoka T, Ishii Y, Okamoto F, Oshika T (2009) Influence of cosmetically tinted soft contact lenses on higher-order wavefront aberrations and visual performance. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 247:225–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barth B, Alves MR, Kara-José N (2008) Visual performance in myopic correction with spectacles and soft contact lenses. Arg Bras Oftalmol 71:90–96Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Berntsen DA, Merchea MM, Richdale K, Mack CJ, Barr JT (2009) Higher-order aberrations when wearing sphere and toric soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 86:115–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dalcoll MW, Alves MR, Barreto JJ, Yamane IS, Bechara S, Mukai A (2008) Evaluation of optical performance of soft contact lens in myopic correction. Arg Bras Oftalmol 71:37–41Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jiang H, Wang D, Yang L, Xie P, He JC (2006) A comparison of wavefront aberrations in eyes wearing different types of soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 83:769–774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gatti RF, Lipencer C (2008) Optical performance of different soft contact lenses based on wavefront analysis. Arq Bras Oftalmol 71:S42–S46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Château N, Blanchard A, Baude D (1998) Influence of myopia and aging on the optimal spherical aberration of soft contact lenses. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 15:2589–2596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    De Brabander J, Château N, Bouchard F, Guidollet S (1998) Contrast sensitivity with soft contact lenses compensated for spherical aberration in high ametropia. Optom Vis Sci 75:37–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cox I (1990) Theoretical calculation of the longitudinal spherical aberration of rigid and soft contact lenses. Optom Vis Sci 67:277–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cox I, Holden BA (1990) Soft contact lens-induced longitudinal spherical aberration and its effect on contrast sensitivity. Optom Vis Sci 67:679–683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lindskoog Pettersson A, Jarkö C, Alvin Å, Unsbo P, Brautaset R (2008) Spherical aberration in contact lens wear. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 31:189–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thibos LN, Hong X, Bradley A, Cheng X (2002) Statistical variation of aberration structure and image quality in a normal population of healthy eyes. J Opt Soc Am 19:2339–2348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang L, Koch DD (2004) Age-related changes in corneal and ocular higher-order aberrations. Am J Ophthalmol 137:988–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wang Y, Zhao K, Jin Y, Niu Y, Zuo T (2003) Changes of higher order aberration with various pupil sizes in the myopic eye. J Refract Surg 19:S270–S274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang L, Koch DD (2003) Ocular higher-order aberrations in individuals screened for refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:1896–1903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Colm McAlinden
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jonathan E. Moore
    • 2
    • 3
  • Victoria E. McGilligan
    • 1
  • Tara C. B. Moore
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biomedical SciencesUniversity of UlsterColeraineUK
  2. 2.Cathedral Eye ClinicUniversity of UlsterBelfastUK
  3. 3.Mater Hospital, Belfast Health and Social Care TrustBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations