Literature DB >> 27484778

Testing vision with angular and radial multifocal designs using Adaptive Optics.

Maria Vinas1, Carlos Dorronsoro2, Veronica Gonzalez2, Daniel Cortes2, Aiswaryah Radhakrishnan2, Susana Marcos2.   

Abstract

Multifocal vision corrections are increasingly used solutions for presbyopia. In the current study we have evaluated, optically and psychophysically, the quality provided by multizone radial and angular segmented phase designs. Optical and relative visual quality were evaluated using 8 subjects, testing 6 phase designs. Optical quality was evaluated by means of Visual Strehl-based-metrics (VS). The relative visual quality across designs was obtained through a psychophysical paradigm in which images viewed through 210 pairs of phase patterns were perceptually judged. A custom-developed Adaptive Optics (AO) system, including a Hartmann-Shack sensor and an electromagnetic deformable mirror, to measure and correct the eye's aberrations, and a phase-only reflective Spatial Light Modulator, to simulate the phase designs, was developed for this study. The multizone segmented phase designs had 2-4 zones of progressive power (0 to +3D) in either radial or angular distributions. The response of an "ideal observer" purely responding on optical grounds to the same psychophysical test performed on subjects was calculated from the VS curves, and compared with the relative visual quality results. Optical and psychophysical pattern-comparison tests showed that while 2-zone segmented designs (angular & radial) provided better performance for far and near vision, 3- and 4-zone segmented angular designs performed better for intermediate vision. AO-correction of natural aberrations of the subjects modified the response for the different subjects but general trends remained. The differences in perceived quality across the different multifocal patterns are, in a large extent, explained by optical factors. AO is an excellent tool to simulate multifocal refractions before they are manufactured or delivered to the patient, and to assess the effects of the native optics to their performance.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptive Optics; Multifocal corrections; Presbyopia; Spatial Light Modulators

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27484778     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  10 in total

1.  Pre-operative simulation of post-operative multifocal vision.

Authors:  Maria Vinas; Sara Aissati; Mercedes Romero; Clara Benedi-Garcia; Nuria Garzon; Francisco Poyales; Carlos Dorronsoro; Susana Marcos
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 3.732

2.  Comparison of vision through surface modulated and spatial light modulated multifocal optics.

Authors:  Maria Vinas; Carlos Dorronsoro; Aiswaryah Radhakrishnan; Clara Benedi-Garcia; Edward Anthony LaVilla; Jim Schwiegerling; Susana Marcos
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2017-03-03       Impact factor: 3.732

Review 3.  Vision science and adaptive optics, the state of the field.

Authors:  Susana Marcos; John S Werner; Stephen A Burns; William H Merigan; Pablo Artal; David A Atchison; Karen M Hampson; Richard Legras; Linda Lundstrom; Geungyoung Yoon; Joseph Carroll; Stacey S Choi; Nathan Doble; Adam M Dubis; Alfredo Dubra; Ann Elsner; Ravi Jonnal; Donald T Miller; Michel Paques; Hannah E Smithson; Laura K Young; Yuhua Zhang; Melanie Campbell; Jennifer Hunter; Andrew Metha; Grazyna Palczewska; Jesse Schallek; Lawrence C Sincich
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Visual simulators replicate vision with multifocal lenses.

Authors:  Maria Vinas; Clara Benedi-Garcia; Sara Aissati; Daniel Pascual; Vyas Akondi; Carlos Dorronsoro; Susana Marcos
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Bifocal and Multifocal Contact Lenses for Presbyopia and Myopia Control.

Authors:  Laura Remón; Pablo Pérez-Merino; Rute J Macedo-de-Araújo; Ana I Amorim-de-Sousa; José M González-Méijome
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 1.909

6.  Vision with different presbyopia corrections simulated with a portable binocular visual simulator.

Authors:  Aiswaryah Radhakrishnan; Daniel Pascual; Susana Marcos; Carlos Dorronsoro
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Vision is protected against blue defocus.

Authors:  Clara Benedi-Garcia; Maria Vinas; Carlos Dorronsoro; Stephen A Burns; Eli Peli; Susana Marcos
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Multifocal acceptance score to evaluate vision: MAS-2EV.

Authors:  Xoana Barcala; Maria Vinas; Mercedes Romero; Enrique Gambra; Juan Luis Mendez-Gonzalez; Susana Marcos; Carlos Dorronsoro
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Optical and Visual Quality With Physical and Visually Simulated Presbyopic Multifocal Contact Lenses.

Authors:  Maria Vinas; Sara Aissati; Ana Maria Gonzalez-Ramos; Mercedes Romero; Lucie Sawides; Vyas Akondi; Enrique Gambra; Carlos Dorronsoro; Thomas Karkkainen; Derek Nankivil; Susana Marcos
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 3.283

10.  A Novel Intraocular Lens Simulator that Allows Patients to Experience the World Through Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Before Surgeries.

Authors:  Kyung-Sun Na; Seong-Jae Kim; Gahee Nam; Minji Ha; Woong-Joo Whang; Eun Chul Kim; Hyun-Seung Kim; Ho Sik Hwang
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.048

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.