Since it is known that peripheral refraction can vary from subject to subject, the left and right eyes of the same subject were compared assuming mirror symmetry between both eyes. Although it may be some individual differences, a high correlation has been found before in literature
21,22 for the relative peripheral refraction and astigmatism between the two eyes. This allows us to have a direct comparison of the natural lens and the IOL in the somehow similar eyes of each subject.
For the fovea, a larger amount of higher order aberrations compared with the healthy young eye was found, as has been reported earlier.
12 However, the comparison between the operated and the nonoperated eye did not show significant differences.
The optical properties of the crystalline lens may have some effect to improve peripheral optics. Based in optical calculations, it was suggested
16 that a pseudophakic eye would have a higher amount of peripheral power errors and astigmatism. Our measurements are in agreement with this theoretical prediction: a larger amount of peripheral astigmatism was observed in all subjects independently of the power or the brand of the IOL. The source of the increase of astigmatism in an eye implanted with an IOL can be the lack of a gradient refractive index lens as the human crystalline lens. To test this hypothesis, ray-tracing simulations were conducted using ZEMAX optical analysis and design software (Zemax Development Corporation, Bellevue, WA). To represent the healthy eye, the Liou and Brennan model eye
23 was chosen. The impact of the gradient index in the lens was tested by comparing the results of this model eye with those when the gradient index lens was changed by a uniform index lens. All dimensions were kept unchanged, with only the refractive index of the lens adjusted to maintain the central refraction of the model eye. This was achieved with a refractive index of 1.4433. The impact of the gradient index of the lens on M and J0 is shown in
Figure 7. The trends found in the simulations are similar to those observed in our experimental measurements, although for J0, there is a slight overestimation compared with the measured results. This can be due to the way of simulating the gradient index.
24 For these simulations, a quadratic decrease of refractive index from the center to the edge was used.
An interesting issue is the possibility of designing new IOLs to improve peripheral optics. One obvious option could be to mimic the natural lens with a gradient index design. Another option
16 is changing the shape factor of the IOL when it is positioned away from the iris. This is similar to an IOL designed to compensate for corneal coma
25 in the fovea. Other alternatives or combinations should be investigated in the future.
However, there is a critical question that also should be addressed. How is visual perception in patients affected by this reduction in peripheral image quality? It is already known that the correction of peripheral refractive errors affects some visual tasks, in particular recognition.
5 However, small changes in peripheral visual acuity were found in a study using an adaptive optics-based instrument
26 in young subjects. It can be hypothesized that patients with IOLs could do worse in tasks where peripheral vision is important as, for example, detection and scene interpretation. This could lead to a higher risk for accidents due to misinterpretation of a scene or due to missing details while moving. Another relevant aspect can be the impact of peripheral optics in visual crowding, the inability to recognize objects at different parts of the visual field.
27 Further specific visual tests will be necessary to fully determine if indeed a degradation of peripheral image quality in pseudophakic patients may have an impact on their daily visual performance.