PURPOSE: To determine the relevance of the different ocular optical components in the refractive state of young adults, paying special attention to the corneal topography represented by the asphericity value. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Corneal topographies and ultrasonic biometries were obtained from 109 university students with different refractive errors (spherical equivalent range: +3.25 D to -11.00 D). A regression study was performed in order to establish the relationships between corneal asphericity and refractive error, as well as other ocular optical components related to the emmetropization mechanism of the eye. RESULTS: The mean asphericity values were -0.23 (SD 0.08, range: -0.42 to -0.03). All the values correspond to the mathematical description of the prolate ellipse, most commonly accepted for the normal human cornea. The statistical correlation between asphericity and equivalent refractive error was not significant, but a significant correlation was found for the asphericity with respect to the radius of curvature, vitreous chamber depth and axial length. CONCLUSIONS: 1) The asphericity values support the generalised morphology of the prolate cornea as the standard. The influence of this configuration on the contact lens fit, refractive surgery or the visual performance of the eye are discussed. 2) Results suggest that, although a relationship between axial length and corneal topography actually exists, it is not likely that the latter has implications for the emmetropization mechanisms which determine the refractive state of the adult eye.
PURPOSE: To determine the relevance of the different ocular optical components in the refractive state of young adults, paying special attention to the corneal topography represented by the asphericity value. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Corneal topographies and ultrasonic biometries were obtained from 109 university students with different refractive errors (spherical equivalent range: +3.25 D to -11.00 D). A regression study was performed in order to establish the relationships between corneal asphericity and refractive error, as well as other ocular optical components related to the emmetropization mechanism of the eye. RESULTS: The mean asphericity values were -0.23 (SD 0.08, range: -0.42 to -0.03). All the values correspond to the mathematical description of the prolate ellipse, most commonly accepted for the normal human cornea. The statistical correlation between asphericity and equivalent refractive error was not significant, but a significant correlation was found for the asphericity with respect to the radius of curvature, vitreous chamber depth and axial length. CONCLUSIONS: 1) The asphericity values support the generalised morphology of the prolate cornea as the standard. The influence of this configuration on the contact lens fit, refractive surgery or the visual performance of the eye are discussed. 2) Results suggest that, although a relationship between axial length and corneal topography actually exists, it is not likely that the latter has implications for the emmetropization mechanisms which determine the refractive state of the adult eye.