Studies for Pseudophakia on Straylight, a Quality of Vision Parameter Tom van den Berg, physicist Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences [email protected]www.herseninstituut.knaw.nl/straylightlab WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 1
37
Embed
Studies for Pseudophakia on Straylight, a Quality of ...wavefrontcongress.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/... · Studies for Pseudophakia on Straylight, a Quality of Vision Parameter
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Studies for Pseudophakia on Straylight,a Quality of Vision Parameter
Tom van den Berg, physicist
Netherlands Institute for NeuroscienceRoyal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciencesowns patent on the Compensation Comparison method
for straylight measurementlicensed to Oculus GmbH for the C-Quant instrument
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 2
Introduction
Function indicators for cataract surgery
Subjective:patient, surgeon
Patient questionnaire highly unreliable on individual basis.Only around 10% of functional variance explained:
Steinberg et al. 1994, Lundstrom and Pesudovs 2009, van der Meulen et al. 2012, etc.
Objective:Visual acuity, gold standard (but confounded with refraction, and
retinal condition. Better: aberrometry based (Applegate, Thibos, Watson))Straylight (not confounded with refraction, nor retinal condition)
Straylight effects in pseudophakiaif added to VA as indicator for cataract surgery
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 3
large angle light spreading (straylight)versus
small angle effects (aberrations, double pass image)
5mm pupil
24°
20’2°
aberrometry double pass
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 4
Visual acuity1 min of arc => 0.02ºContrast sensitivity18..3 cycl/degree=> 0.06..0.33º
Visual acuity1 min of arc => 0.02º
Straylight >1º
Visual acuity1 min of arc 0.02º
The Point Spread Function (PSF)
Contrast sensitivity18..3 cycl/degree 0.06..0.33º
CIE 1999 standardCaucasian/normal/average/50y
Graphics by Ralph Michael
Ophthalmic andPhysiological
Optics 29 (2009)345-350
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 5
Objective assessment of straylight
Establish identity between the observed light and a reference light of known value
psychophysics
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 6
TJTP van den Berg 7
• International visual photometric principle (CIE)
• Bipartite field comparison of straylight to comparison light
• Functional value: straylight parameter “s”, given as log(s) (compare logMAR)
• Estimation of individual measurement reliability
Psychophysical method“Compensation Comparison”
Van den Berg, Coppens, FranssenARVO 2005
characteristics
Oculus C-Quant
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 7
1.0
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.5
1.0 1.3 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.5log(s) optical (2 methods)
aver
age
(n=4
) log
(s)
psyc
hoph
ysic
al
Testing the psychophysical methodusing scatter models of known value
Examples of scatter models
7 scatter models4 subjects
Ophthalmic and PhysiologicalOptics 29 (2009) ) 345-350
accurate assessment
of straylight in patients possible
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 8
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 9
In vitro straylight measurementŁabuz et al. Biomed. Optics Exp. 2015
Cuvette with light scattering sample (IOL)
Exposure sample (IOL)Observer
Sees only bipartite field
How does straylight compare to visual acuity?
Relation complaint Straylight
Simulations of patient visionfor typical early cataract values
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 10
average normal eye
visual acuity 0.4 decimal
straylight 2xincreased
“hazy vision”
signs in our institute’s elevator
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 11
visual acuity 0.4 decimal
increasedstraylight log(s)=1.4
against-the-lightface recognition
average normal eye
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 12
visual acuity 0.4 decimal
increasedstraylight log(s) = 1.47
upcoming headlightswhile driving at night
average normal eye
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 13
Subjective comparison of straylight and visual acuity
Questionnaire study in an (early) cataract population(Van der Meulen et al. JCRS 2012;38:840-848)
VFQ (37 questions; Mangione et al. NEI version 2000)and 5 Straylight focused questions (SLQ)
217 pre-op cataract patients
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 14
Typical questions in the questionnaires (simplified)
How difficult is it to read a newspaper?
How difficult is it to judge facial expression, because of your vision?
How difficult is it to check your clothing, because of your vision?
How difficult is it to drive a car during daytime in your own neighborhood, because of your vision?
How strong do you experience blinding while driving a car at night.
Scoring on a 5-point scale, from very bad, to no problem at all,transformed into average scales from 0 – 100.VFQ contains 37 questions, SLQ 5 questions
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 15
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
corre
latio
n ra
tio (n
orm
aliz
ed to
VFQ
vs
VA)
relative weigth VA/SL (leftmost pure SL, rightmost pure VA)
VFQSL-Qtotal-Q
correlation results questionnaire outcomes Van der Meulen et al. JCRS2012;38:840-848
Straylight and VA contribute in an approximate 1:1 relation
1 : 1straylight visual acuity
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 16
Population values
the normal eyelens aging/cataract formation
(quality assessment in refractive surgery,corneal dystrophies, dry eyes, albinism, vitreous
turbidity, …. )
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 17
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 18
0.4
0.7
1
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.5
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
log
stra
ylig
ht p
aram
eter
Age (years)
gray symbols: driver study(x=cataract; o=pseudophakia)orange symbols:cataract surgery study
Straylight increase with aging and cataract formationGray symbols EU driver study. Amer. J. Ophthalmol. 2007 144:358-363.
Orange symbols cataract surgery study. JCRS 2012 38:840-848.
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 19
0.4
0.7
1
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.5
-0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80
stra
ylig
ht v
alue
(log
(s))
visual acuity (logMar)
straylight > 4x increased
better values visual acuitybelow driver norm
worst valuesgray symbols: driver study(x=cataract; o=pseudophakia)orange symbols:cataract surgery study
Straylight compared to visual acuity.Gray symbols EU driver study. Amer. J. Ophthalmol. 2007 144:358-363.
Orange symbols cataract surgery study. JCRS 2012 38:840-848.
Does cataract surgery help against straylight?
If so, what is the break-even point?
Or
what straylight level is to be expected in pseudophakia?
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 20
Oculus C-Quant
Straylight pre- and post routine cataract surgeryStraylight improvement factor 3.24 (sd 2.3)
(Visual acuity improvement factor 1.74 (sd 1.4))
95% chance of improvement log(s)=1.4(309 cataract surgeries)
normal phakic interval
Oculus C-Quant
Reference level log(s)=0.9
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 21
y = 0.0051x + 0.8622
0.40
0.70
1.00
1.30
1.60
1.90
2.20
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
straylight log(s)
age (years)
pseudophakicphakic normLinear (pseudophakic)
Cataract center. Van der Meulen et al. JCRS2012309 CE surgeries, no PCO.
-Only in a limited number of cases does straylight return to the young healthy reference level. -In most cases straylight much better than the phakic best-eyes norm.
-Age effect on pseudophakic straylight
Reference level log(s)=0.9
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 22
y = 0.0040x + 0.87420.4
0.7
1
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
straylight lo
g(s)
age (years)
preoppostopphakic norm
Reference level log(s)=0.9
Refractive surgery center; Lapid et al. submitted 2013; 160 lens exchange surgeries on good VA eyes (logMAR<0.1).
Same finding; in limited number of cases does straylight return to the young healthy reference level. In most cases postop straylight better than the phakic norm for best eyes. Age effect.
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 23
Literature survey on Straylight in uncompromised pseudophakiaŁabuz et al. JCRS 2015
The mean straylight value (± SD) for1,869 eyes is 1.21 (± 0.21) log(s) with meanage 68 (± 9) years.
24
Linear model of straylight-age dependency for 13 articles (lines). Line extent gives the age range. For 3 studies the regression line was not obtainable. The diamonds
represent the centers of gravity of the 16 individual datasets.
Reference level log(s)=0.9
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg
Predictability of improvement upon CEThe 558 available pre- and postoperative records were analyzed to assess
the Break Even Point (BEP) for pre-operative straylight (to achieve improvement).
25
Improvement of straylight upon crystalline lens exchange. The diamonds indicate the BEP of the different age groups
Literature survey on Straylight in uncompromised pseudophakiaŁabuz et al. JCRS 2015
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 26
Selected studies on IOLs
IOL deposits and calcification
A RaynerB HydroviewC Aquasense
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 27
.
.Mrs W., age 72 yearsVision complaints not corresponding VA.Extreme straylightLog(s) = 2.22 (20x)Deposit on IOL
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 28
Blundell, Knox Cartwright et al ARVO 2009, BJO 2010
Study eye lens: Hydroview B&L
Clinically opacifiedAround 5 x increased straylight(VA 25% loss)
“Clear”(not slitlamp detected)Around 2 xIncreased straylight(VA no loss)
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 29
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
scatter angle (degrees)
equi
vale
nt s
trayl
ight
val
ue (l
og(s
))
0122637B
0069262X
100x
10x
1x
Straylight from 2 explanted calcified Aquasense lenses
Porooshani et al ARVO 2008, van der Meulen et al BJO 2008
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 30
Diffractive multifocal
The edges of diffractive profilesscatter light
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 31
0.4
0.7
1
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.5
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
age
log(
s)
mono ODmono OSdiffractive ODdiffractive OSage normalage normal +2SDage normal -2SD
Straylight values 6 months after cataract surgery.
Multifocals give more straylight than monofocals
De Vries, Nuijts, Tjia,et al. JCRS 2008
+sd
- sd
referencelevel
Restor
Monof.
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 32
Comparison between diffractive multifocalsŁabuz et al. JCRS 2016 in press
Hydrophobic multifocal IOLs give more straylight (p=0.001)
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 33
Glistenings
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 34
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2C-Quant full eye straylight value log(s)
glis
teni
ng c
alcu
late
d st
rayl
ight
val
ue lo
g(s) 6 eyes
straylight from glisteningscompared to total straylightlines indicate fraction of total(100%, 50%, 20%)
100%
50%
20%
In some cases may glistenings contribute significantly to straylight.
normal eye
(extreme) straylight
Large angle light spreading and visual acuity
WaveFr 5Mar16 TJTP van den Berg 36
Summary
Straylight measurement in vivo according international standard
Also possible in vitro, on IOLs, directly comparable to the clinical straylight measurement
Cataract surgery is efficient to reduce straylight, but room for improvement
Straylight from IOL associated problemscan be considerable