That there was no relationship between aberrations and refractive
error may be due to the limited range of myopia in our subjects.
Simonet et al.
17 and Marcos et al.
18 have
reported that aberrations increase with increasing myopia. However, the
latter group found that this effect was attributable to 7- to 13-D
myopes. They found no relationship over the range of myopia represented
in our sample.
In our sample, third- and fourth-order aberrations were highly variable
across all ages, although they both show an increase with age. The
higher order aberrations (fifth through seventh orders), however,
showed a robust increase with age. The proportional increase in both
fourth-order and higher order aberrations with age was greater than for
third-order aberrations.
The high degree of variability in third- and fourth-order aberrations
is similar to the variability found in spherical equivalent and
astigmatism. There are many potential sources of lower order
aberrations, including shapes of optical components, decentering of the
pupil, and misalignment of lens and cornea. However, higher order
aberrations are likely to have more local causes such as small
irregularities in shape and refractive indices of the eye’s optical
elements. Although our results cannot be tied to any specific locus
(such as lens versus cornea) or cause, it is likely that the hardening
of the lens
19 and thickening of the lenticular
cortex
20 with age, as well as the early development
of undiagnosed cataracts, contributed to the increase in both
aberrations and ocular scattering. In addition, reduction with
age in tear volume
21 and tear film
stability
22 could be related to an
increase in corneal surface irregularities and therefore to increased
amounts of high-order aberrations. Guirao et al.
23 have
shown that corneal aberrations measured by videokeratography increase
with age, but not to a degree sufficient to account for the losses in
MTF.
It has been suggested that pupillary miosis, the decrease in natural
pupil size with age, mitigates the effects of degraded optical quality
in older eyes.
3 Although we did not collect data on
natural pupil size for these subjects, it seems unlikely that
differences in pupil size could eliminate the effects of the increases
in aberrations that we found. Calver et al.
3 stated that a
1-mm difference in natural pupil size results in an average MTF in
older subjects that is almost identical with that of the younger
subjects. Their data show a high degree of variability in third- and
fourth-order aberrations, as do ours. However, the fact that they did
not take into account higher order aberrations, which in our sample
increased very regularly with age, may have obscured the real
differences between younger and older MTFs. The mean MTF of our younger
subjects with a 6-mm pupil was compared with the mean MTF of our older
group with 3-, 4-, and 5-mm pupils.
Figure 6 shows the comparison for 3-mm pupils. The results for 4- and 5-mm
pupils were similar and are not shown. Even with a difference of 3 mm
in pupil diameters, the older group’s MTF lay below the younger,
although the difference was not significant (F = 1.9,
P = 0.18). The interaction of age group with MTF was
significant (F = 10.4,
P < 0.0001), indicating
that the shapes of the two functions are different, with the older
group showing a more rapid decline in resolution at high spatial
frequencies. However, this difference resulted primarily from
diffraction effects for the smaller pupil size rather than from
aberrations, per se. It should be noted that this analysis did not take
into account the possibility that the pupil center moves as the pupil
size changes, which could produce different MTFs for the 3-mm pupils.
However, this decentration is expected to be small
24 and
is unlikely to change the results. The effect of decentration would be
even smaller for 4- and 5-mm pupils.
Unlike double-pass imaging, our psychophysical procedure was not
sensitive to scattered light. Although aberrations occasionally caused
blur in the test spot, the subject always aligned the brightest portion
of the spot to the cross. Thus, scatter did not affect the alignment
task.
Figure 7 shows a comparison of the average MTFs for our youngest and eldest
groups to group average MTFs derived from double-pass images from
Guirao et al.
8 The MTFs from that study are based upon the
parameters of exponential fits
25 provided in their paper.
For both age groups, the MTFs of the present study lay above those
computed from double-pass images
(Figs. 7a 7b) . This is to be
expected, because the double-pass MTFs include the effects of scatter
and higher order aberrations, whereas our MTFs were reconstructed from
a limited set of Zernike coefficients. Furthermore, temporal summation
during the photographic exposure time may produce blur in the
double-pass measurements, potentially resulting in underestimation of
optical quality, whereas averaging runs in our technique may smooth the
estimated wavefront, resulting in an overestimation of the
MTF.
26 However, this cannot explain the difference in the
ratios of the two kinds of MTFs for the two groups
(Fig. 7c) . For both
groups, this ratio increased with spatial frequency, but the increase
was especially pronounced in the older subjects. This increasing ratio
was consistent with an increase in forward scattering in the optical
media with age, suggesting increased amounts of very small-scale
irregularities in the optical media.