You are on page 1of 7

LABORATORY SCIENCE

Light distribution in diffractive multifocal


optics and its optimization
Valdemar Portney, PhD

PURPOSE: To expand a geometrical model of diffraction efficiency and its interpretation to the
multifocal optic and to introduce formulas for analysis of far and near light distribution and their
application to multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to diffraction efficiency optimization.
SETTING: Medical device consulting firm, Newport Coast, California, USA.
DESIGN: Experimental study.
METHOD: Application of a geometrical model to the kinoform (single focus diffractive optical
element) was expanded to a multifocal optic to produce analytical definitions of light split between
far and near images and light loss to other diffraction orders.
RESULTS: The geometrical model gave a simple interpretation of light split in a diffractive multifocal
IOL. An analytical definition of light split between far, near, and light loss was introduced as curve
fitting formulas. Several examples of application to common multifocal diffractive IOLs were devel-
oped; for example, to light-split change with wavelength. The analytical definition of diffraction
efficiency may assist in optimization of multifocal diffractive optics that minimize light loss.
CONCLUSION: Formulas for analysis of light split between different foci of multifocal diffractive
IOLs are useful in interpreting diffraction efficiency dependence on physical characteristics, such
as blaze heights of the diffractive grooves and wavelength of light, as well as for optimizing multi-
focal diffractive optics.
Financial Disclosure: Disclosure is found in the footnotes.
J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37:20532059 Q 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS
Supplemental material available at www.jcrsjournal.org.

The design and optical performance of multifocal diffractive design using the example of the Restor mul-
intraocular lenses (IOLs) have been described by Davi- tifocal IOL (Alcon Laboratories, Inc.).
son and Simpson.1 These authors provide an excellent For historical perspective, the concept of apodized
overview of different multifocal IOL designs with lenses was originally introduced by Cohen,2 who
description of blaze-shape diffractive optic character- described a progressive intensity phase bifocal lens.
istics such as diffraction efficiency as a percentage of Although diffraction efficiency at a given diffraction
light to diffraction orders. The blaze type of diffractive order plays a central role in the imaging characteristics
surface implies sawtooth-shaped diffraction grooves. at that order,3,4 this determination usually lies within
The authors also describe the apodized multifocal the realm of optical science, leaving a potentially large
gap in understanding by the surgeons who are the
ultimate users of this technology. An additional issue
Submitted: November 10, 2010. is the complexity of mathematical diffraction effi-
Final revision submitted: April 12, 2011. ciency calculations that plays a negative role in the
Accepted: April 21, 2011. ability to optimize diffraction efficiency and improve
From Vision Advancement LLC, Newport Coast, California, USA. the overall image performance of a multifocal diffrac-
tive optic.
Financial disclosure: The author has a proprietary interest in the Op- In this study, I applied the geometrical model to dif-
tivis multifocal diffractive optic.
fraction multifocal optics to interpret light distribution
Corresponding author: Valdemar Portney, PhD, 8 Via Ambra, between far and near foci in terms of refraction, which
Newport Coast, California 92657, USA. E-mail: vidadv@cox.net. offers a more intuitive understanding of diffraction

Q 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS 0886-3350/$ - see front matter 2053


Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.04.038
2054 LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS

optics by surgeons who are interested in diffractive mul- The parameter m is called the blaze-ray ratio because it de-
tifocal IOLs. This article also provides formulas that al- fines a relative direction of the blaze ray in relation to the di-
rections toward the far and near foci. According to the
low an analytical determination of light split between
geometrical mode, the blaze-ray ratio replaces the phase-
far and near in relationship to blaze height (step height shift parameter a in the sinc envelope, as shown in equation
of the diffractive groove) and light wavelength as well 1. Thus, instead of dealing with phase shift, which is an ab-
as a determination of light loss (ie, light directed to the stract term, and corresponding complex mathematics, one
diffraction orders that are outside far and near foci can work with blaze-ray ratio defined by the refraction of
the blaze ray. The term refraction is more commonly under-
and thus play a negative role in image quality and pho-
stood and offers a more physically tangible explanation of
tic phenomena). Examples are provided for application light split by a diffractive multifocal optic.
to common multifocal diffractive optics. In a small-angle approximation, m is the ratio of the angle
between the blaze ray and the direction toward 0-order
MATERIALS AND METHODS diffraction (far focus) to the angle between the directions
toward 0-order and (1)-order (near focus). For example,
The theory of scalar diffractive optics was used as a basis for
the blaze-ray ratio equals 1 if the blaze-ray direction coin-
the determination of light distribution in multifocal diffrac-
cides with the direction toward (1)-order diffraction
tive IOLs. A broader description of scalar diffractive theory
(near), as shown by sinc envelope A in Figure 1, B.
can be found in the article by OShea et al.5 Londo~ no and
Using diffraction efficiencies per equation 1 at far focus
Clark6 introduced a geometrical model for modeling diffrac-
(m Z 0) and near focus (m Z 1), we can construct the func-
tion efficiency in the kinoform. The geometrical model
tions defining diffraction efficiencies at far focus, near focus,
applied to a single-focus optic was expanded to a blaze-
and the light loss to other diffraction orders as functions of
type multifocal diffraction optic in this paper.
the blaze ray ratio m as follows:
Equation 1 is the basis of the scalar diffractive optic and is
called sinc envelope. h0; m
F  function Fm Z (2)
h0; m h1; m
hm; m Z Sinc2 pm  m0 m (1)
h1; m
Sinx N-function Nm Z (3)
Sincx Z with x Z pm  m0 m h0; m h1; m
x
where h is the diffraction efficiency at m-order of diffraction, L-function Lm Z 1  Fm  Nm (4)
m0 is the diffraction order for which the diffraction efficiency
is 100% at the design wavelength, and parameter m Z 1. A where F-function defines a fraction of light between far and
physical meaning of the parameter m is explained below. near directed to far focus as the function of the blaze-ray ratio
Equation 1 is called sinc envelope in scalar diffractive optics m, N-function defines a fraction of light between far and near
with blaze-shape diffraction grooves because it defines the directed to near focus as the function of the blaze-ray ratio m,
amplitude of light at the diffraction order. Sinc envelope in and L-function defines a fraction of light outside far and near
the form of h(m) Z Sinc2[p(m  a)] is a well-known scalar foci as the function of the blaze-ray ratio m.
diffraction optic formula used for diffractive multifocal Diffraction efficiency determined by a blaze-ray relative
optics with diffraction grooves approximated by a parabolic position within the sinc envelope varies between the blaze
profile and where the parameter a is a phase shift at the max- rays at different locations in the presence of ocular aberra-
imum depth of the diffraction groove step.79 Conceptually, tions. To generalize a blaze-ray application to light distribu-
different profiles, such as sinusoidal or binary, can be used, tion between the diffraction orders to a diffraction lens as
which would result in a different formula for diffraction effi- a whole, a contribution of ocular aberrations is ignored.
ciency.7,10 Details of the actual profiles of the blaze diffractive This enables a comparison of different designs of the diffrac-
multifocal IOLs referenced in this article are not in the public tion multifocal IOLs based on the geometrical model of the
domain. Nevertheless, there is indication that these profiles diffraction efficiency.
can be approximated by a parabolic profile and the sinc- A relative direction of a blaze ray and, therefore, the blaze-
envelope definition can be applied to their diffraction ray ratio m, depends on 3 factors: blaze height, wavelength of
efficiencies.8,11,12 the light, and dispersion of the material. Each factor is con-
The geometrical model introduces a blaze ray as an imag- secutively represented in the formula below:
inable ray refracted at a surface point of a diffraction groove,      
hr l0 nl  nw l
and the sinc envelope is centered over this blaze ray and m y   (5)
h1 l nl0  nw l0
defines light distribution around it along the optical axis.6
The actual light split between different diffraction orders is where h(r) is the blaze height as a function of distance (r)
defined by the intersection of this light distribution around from the lens center; h1 is the blaze height that produces
the blaze ray with the locations of the diffraction orders the kinoform at (1)-order, that is 100% diffraction efficiency
along the optical axis. Figure 1 shows the sinc envelope at (1)-order; l0 is the design wavelength, that is the wave-
and the meaning of blaze ray and the corresponding termi- length at which the diffraction efficiency and add power of
nology used with multifocal diffractive optics. the multifocal IOL is designed, and this is usually set at the
In the case of a multifocal ophthalmic diffractive lens, the peak of retinal response l0 Z 0.55 mm; l is a wavelength of
parameters in equation 1 are light that is actually diffracted by the multifocal diffractive
optic; n(l) and n(l0) are the refractive indices of the lens ma-
m0 Z  1; which is the diffraction order for near focus; terial at wavelengths l and l0, respectively; nw(l) and nw(l0)
m Z 0; which is the diffraction order for far focus; and are the refractive indices of the eye medium adjacent to the
0%m%1 IOL diffractive surface at wavelength l and l0, respectively.

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011


LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS 2055

Figure 1. A: Light diffraction by a diffraction optic towards diffraction orders. The imaginable blaze ray is defined by the refraction at a diffraction
groove surface. The blaze ray is refracted along the middle direction between directions toward far and near foci (direction B), which is equivalent
to the Tecnis multifocal IOL design. Directions toward diffraction order serve as the channels along which light can only travel but the direc-
tion of the blaze ray determines the light split between these channels as explained in Figure 1, B. B: Sinc envelope is centered over a blaze ray
according to scalar diffraction optics. Sinc envelope A is centered over the blaze-ray direction coinciding with the direction to (-1)-diffraction
order. It results in 100% of light allocation to this order because values of sinc envelope are zeros at all other diffraction orders. Sinc envelope
B is centered over the blaze ray direction at the middle between 0-order (far) and (1)-order (near), as shown in A. Sinc envelope B shows light
diffraction to multiple orders because it has approximately 40% value at each 0-order (far) and (1)-order (near) and the remainder approxi-
mately 20% at other orders.

The contribution of a material dispersion particularly in RESULTS


the aqueous humor is fairly small (Appendix, available at
http://jcrsjournal.org) and is neglected in this paper, bring- Functions of diffraction efficiencies at far, near, and
ing the blaze-ray ratio m to the following expression: outside the vision range shown in equations 2, 3, and
    4 are depicted graphically in Figure 2: 100% diffraction
hr l0
mr; l y  (6) efficiency at near corresponds to the blaze ray ratio
h1 l
m Z 1, and at far to m Z 0.
An objective of this article is to define all 3 functions of Equation 1 was applied to equations 2, 3, and 4 to
equations 2, 3, and 4 in an analytical form for direct calcu- calculate the corresponding diffraction efficiencies
lation of light split between far, near, and outside the im- and then the curve fitting was applied in order to
age range (light loss) for different multifocal diffractive arrive at simple analytical formulas that can be more
optic designs and to allow optimization of a multifocal dif-
fractive optic that reduces the light loss outside far and easily included for optical design software or even
near foci. for by hand calculations in diffraction multifocal
The following multifocal IOLs are considered in the
analysis for light distribution: the Tecnis multifocal (Abbott
Medical Optics), for which the equal light split for the design
wavelength is 0.55 mm; the Acri.Lisa (Carl Zeiss Meditec),
which has a multifocal surface consisting of phase and
main subzones, where the phase subzone acts as the blaze
height and the main subzones as a blaze multifocal, with
light split 65/35 for far to near13,14; and the Restor, which
has an apodization form. The apodization, in general, was
described by Lee and Simpson,15 but not as a specific func-
tion h(r). Nevertheless, the apodization form of the Restor
IOL can be determined from published information on the
light split for a given pupil diameter.1 The OptiVis multifocal
IOL uses the principle of more unequal light split between
far and near foci.A The IOL design is more complex than
that of a traditional diffractive multifocal IOL because it in- Figure 2. Relative light split between far (F-function) and near (N-
cludes a refractive zone of progressively varying power function) as fractions of their sum and relative light loss outside
that incorporated intermediate foci into the IOL specifica- far and near foci (L-function) as functions of blaze ray ratio m. The
tions.16 The progressive power variation incorporated a sim- maximum light loss occurred at the blaze ray ratio m Z 0.5, where
ilar principle in the previously introduced refractive approximately 80% of light is equally split between far and near
multifocal IOLs, such as the Array (Abbott Medical Optics) foci. The light loss is reduced with a more unequal split between
and Rezoom (Abbott Medical Optics).17,18 far and near.

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011


2056 LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS

optic analysis. Curve fitting yields the following ana- to a blaze shape for light-split analysis. Phase sub-
lytical descriptions of F-, N-, and L-functions within zones of this IOL are shaped to provide far refraction
G0.3% tolerance of the curves in Figure 2: power. A measurement indicates that a phase subzone
 is approximately equal to 0.16th of the total diffractive
Nm Z 1:012  exp 5  m2:9 (7) groove size, meaning that the additional approxi-
mately equal to 0.16th of light is directed to far focus
The F-function and the N-function are symmetrical that otherwise is lost from the corresponding groove
around the blaze-ray ratio m Z 0.5; therefore area.
Fm Z N1  m (8) Using equations 7 to 9 and the iterative process for m,
one can correlate the 65/35 ratio with the correspond-
and ing blaze diffractive lens that directs 52% of light to far,
30% to near, and 18% is light loss. The phase subzones
180
Lm Z 0:096  sinP 6:1  m  1:5R 0:094 provide an additional 0.16 $ 18%, approximately equal
p
to 3% of light for far focus bringing the total fraction of
(9)
far light to 55%, thus making the far to near ratio equal
where the argument of sine function is in degrees. The to 55/30 to approximately 65/35 as per the published
Excel program uses (Microsoft Corp.) radian in trigo- specification. Thus, the phase subzones reduce the
nometric functions, and a multiplication by 180/p in light loss from 18% to about 15%.
sine argument should be omitted if the Excel program The far:near ratio without the contribution of the
is used in the calculation. phase subzones is approximately 63/37, according to
A blaze-ray ratio m is defined by equation 6 and is 52% for far distribution and 30% for near distribution,
a constant in monochromatic light if the blaze height with the remainder being light loss. The iteration of
h(r) is also a constant. On the other hand, m is variable equation 7 yields a blaze-ray ratio m approximately
with distance to the lens center (r) if blaze height h(r) equal to 0.433 for the design wavelength 0.55 mm for
varies with the distance to the lens center due to near-split fraction of 0.37. Blaze-ray ratios at different
apodization. wavelengths are calculated per equation 6, and the
Let us apply the F-, N-, and L-functions to multifocal corresponding light split is determined from equations
diffractive IOLs. 7 to 9 assuming a blaze shape of the diffractive surface
(ie, without phase-subzone contribution). The light
Tecnis Multifocal Intraocular Lens distribution for far is increased by 3% at each wave-
length with the contribution of the phase subzones
Let us look into light split at different wavelengths:
and with material dispersion neglected. Table 2 shows
design wavelength 0.55 mm (green color), 0.45 mm
the corresponding chromatic light split and percent-
(blue color), and 0.63 mm (red color). The constant
age of light loss.
blaze height of the Tecnis multifocal IOL is such that
the blaze ray is refracted exactly at the middle between Restor Multifocal Intraocular Lens
far and near foci for the design wavelength 0.55 mm re-
Apodization results in the blaze-ray ratio m being
sulting in m Z 0.5. Blaze-ray ratios are calculated from a function of distance to the lens center (r) per equation
equation 6 at different wavelengths, and light split is 6, where the blaze height h(r) is a function of the dis-
determined from equations 7 to 9. Table 1 shows the tance (r). It is more useful in the case of apodization
results. to convert F-, N-, and L-functions into functions of
(r), which is a means of demonstrating the
Acri.Lisa Multifocal Intraocular Lens apodization.
The Acri.Lisa multifocal IOL is not a blaze-shape Figure 3, A, shows the light split with the addition of
multifocal but can be converted to the form equivalent a Restor light-loss graph calculated as the residual to

Table 2. Acri.LISA multifocal IOL chromatic light split.


Table 1. Tecnis multifocal IOL chromatic light split.
Light Split with Phase-Subzone
Light Split Contribution
Wavelength Blaze-Ray
Wavelength (mm) Blaze-Ray Ratio m Far to Near Loss % (mm) Ratio m Far to Near Loss %

0.55 (green) 0.5 50/50 19 0.55 (green) 0.433 65/35 15


0.45 (blue) 0.611 29/71 17 0.45 (blue) 0.529 46/54 16
0.63 (red) 0.437 62/38 18 0.63 (red) 0.379 76/27 14

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011


LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS 2057

corresponding blaze ray ratio as a function of lens


radius. A function of the blaze-ray ratio is defined
numerically per small steps of the lens radius by
iteration of equation 7 for near-light fraction. Blaze-
ray ratios are then calculated from equation 6 for
different wavelengths at each lens radial step, and
the corresponding apodization forms for short and
long wavelengths are determined from equations
7 to 9. The effective light splits at 3.0 mm diameter at
different wavelengths are then defined by integration
of the corresponding apodization form for the diame-
ter. Table 3 shows the results.

OptiVis Multifocal Intraocular Lens


Figure 2 shows that light loss can be reduced by
apodizing the OptiVis multifocal IOL in such a way
that it splits the larger fraction of light to far focus or
to near focus.
The use of the equations 7 to 9, together with
a Zemax ray-tracing program for image quality calcu-
lation, yielded the OptiVis multifocal IOL apodization
form shown in Figure 4, A, and the relative energy
distribution with pupils for far, intermediate, and
Figure 3. A: Light split within a pupil diameter. The graphs include near with small light loss shown in Figure 4, B.
a combination of diffraction and refraction contributions outside the Blaze-ray application to the OptiVis multifocal IOL
diffraction zone and do not illustrate a light split at a given diameter
takes a more complex form because of the presence
of the diffraction zone, which is shown by the apodization form in B.
B: Restor multifocal IOL apodization form. The light split at each op- of a central refractive zone of intermediate and far
tic diameter shows an equal and constant light split for up to approx- powers in addition to apodization within the diffrac-
imately 2.0 mm diameter and then a gradual increase of a fraction of tion annular zone of 1.5 mm and 3.8 mm diameters.
light directed to far, thus reaching 100% at 3.6 mm diameter at the The calculation of light split at different wavelengths
edge of the diffraction zone.
follows the procedure described for the Restor multifo-
cal IOL without a contribution of the central refraction
100% from the sum of far and near. Light-split graphs
zone (ie, refractive zone contribution to far is assumed
in Figure 3, A, define the fractions of light within
to be zero). Then, the light split is scaled by the inclu-
different pupil diameters, and the apodization form
sion of the additional light contribution to far by the
defines a light split at each optic diameter to help char-
central 1.5 mm refraction zone, where the far to inter-
acterize the light split by the diffraction zone itself.
mediate split is 35/65. No light loss is contributing
An apodization is then calculated by differentiating
from the central zone because of the refraction nature
the light split within the pupil; the corresponding
of the zone. Table 4 shows the results.
apodization form of the Restor multifocal IOL is shown
in Figure 3, B. The blaze-ray ratio function m(r),
and therefore the apodization defined by a blaze height DISCUSSION
function h(r). can be determined by combining the local The curves of diffraction efficiencies for far and near in
loss graph of the apodization form in Figure 3, B, and Figure 2 are equivalent to the one in Figure 2, B, by
equation 9. Cohen.7 The advantage of the functions per equations
Blaze-ray application to the Restor multifocal IOL
takes a slightly more complex form because the Table 3. Restor multifocal IOL chromatic light split for 3.0 mm
blaze-ray ratio varies with the distance from the lens diameter.
center (lens radius) according to the apodization de-
Light Split
sign. Light distribution varies with the lens radius
and can be defined at a certain lens diameter as effec- Wavelength (mm) Far to Near Loss %
tive light distribution, for instance at 3.0 mm diameter
0.55 (green) 68/32 15
corresponding to a nominal photopic pupil size. The 0.45 (blue) 50/50 15
apodization form of the Restor multifocal IOL for the 0.63 (red) 75/25 14
design wavelength 0.55 mm is used to determine the

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011


2058 LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS

Table 4. OptiVis multifocal IOL chromatic light split for 3.0 mm


diameter.

Light Split with Central Refraction


Zone Contribution

Wavelength (mm) Far to Near Intermediate % Loss %

0.55 (green) 41/59 16 4


0.45 (blue) 36/64 16 4
0.63 (red) 48/52 16 8

transfer function (MTF) as the measure of retinal


image quality. For instance, a change from 50/50 of
far to near light split to about 30/70 (a split in blue
light) changes the MTF at 50 line pairs (lp)/mm from
0.33 to 0.18 for far and 0.55 for near and a change to
62/38 split (a split in red light) changes the MTF at
50 lp/mm to 0.40 for far and 0.23 for near.
The formulas of the F-, N-, and L-functions in this ar-
ticle allow analytic assessment of light split between
far, near, and light loss in a blaze-shape multifocal dif-
fractive optic at different wavelengths and blaze
heights. In the case of an apodization, the functions
are converted into a apodization form, where a light
Figure 4. A: OptiVis multifocal IOL apodization form of the multifo- split is defined as a function of surface coordinates.
cal diffractive zone shows that a relatively small area of the lens cor-
responds to a substantially equal light split between far and near
A shape of the graph in the apodization form may be
associated with larger light loss. The local loss shows a relative light similar to the relative energy graphs as shown for
loss at a given radial distance from the lens center. B: OptiVis multi- the Restor multifocal IOL; however, a particular bene-
focal IOL light split within pupil diameter shows relative energies fit comes into play when a refractive zone contributes
between foci within different pupils. The light loss graph is the inte- to a light distribution because an apodization form
gration of local loss of the apodization form within a pupil diameter.
The light loss is reduced because of the presence of the refractive
demonstrates a light split by the diffraction only. For
zones at both sides of the diffractive zone with their 100% light uti- instance, the peripheral refractive zone of the Restor
lization and thanks to the optimized apodization form. IOL affects the light energy split outside the diffractive
zone, making the relative energy graphs different from
3, 4, and 5 is that they transfer diffraction efficiency cal- the Restor multifocal IOL apodization form. In another
culations per scalar diffraction optic into simple Snell example, the presence of the refractive zones at both
law of refraction of the blaze ray defined by the geo- sides of the diffractive zone in the OptiVis multifocal
metrical optic. IOL results in the relative energy graphs being signif-
This article offers analytical definitions of light split icantly different from the OptiVis multifocal IOL
per known blaze heights and wavelength. The impor- apodization form.
tance of the material dispersion for the light split can The geometrical model of light distribution allows
also be assessed. A comparison with the analysis by comparison of different diffractive multifocal designs
Castignoles et al.,4 in which the material dispersion for light-split sensitivity to a wavelength of light. For
was taken into account, shows that the results did instance, the far-to-near split for the Tecnis multifocal
not differ substantially. The conversion of the absolute IOL at a short wavelength is 29/71 Z 0.41 and in-
split 0.26/0.6/0.14 for 0.45 mm wavelengths between creases to 62/38 Z 1.63 for a long wavelength, corre-
far, near, and loss (parabolic blaze shape) to the rela- sponding to the change by a factor of 4 as a measure
tive split of far to near yields approximately 30.2 to of chromatic sensitivity. Far-to-near split changes
70 in Castignoles et al.4 versus 29 to 71 in Table 1. In from a short to long wavelength by a factor of 3.3 for
the case of red light of 0.63 mm wavelength, the light the Acri.Lisa IOL. Some reduction in sensitivity comes
split of far to near is about 62 to 38, coinciding with from the non-equal light split for the design wave-
the results in Table 1. The difference at short wave- length and the contribution of the phase subzones.
length is likely associated with the material dispersion. The far-to-near split from short to long wavelength is
The analysis by Castignoles et al.4 allows a rough as- reduced to a factor of 3 for the Restor multifocal IOL
sessment of the impact of light split on the modulation for a 3.0 mm diameter. The results of the apodization

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011


LABORATORY SCIENCE: LIGHT DISTRIBUTION IN DIFFRACTIVE MULTIFOCAL OPTICS 2059

design of the lens at a 3.0 mm diameter is similar to the patentstorm.us/patents/4637697/fulltext.html. Accessed June
chromatic light split by the Acri.Lisa multifocal IOL. 15, 2011
10. Cohen AL, inventor. Multifocal optical device with novel phase
Far-to-near split from short to long wavelength is re- zone plate and method for making. US patent 4 995 714. Febru-
duced to a factor of 1.6 for the OptiVis multifocal ary 26, 1991. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/
IOL. The chromatic sensitivity of far-to-near light split 4995714/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
and light loss are reduced by optimizing the apodiza- 11. Choi J. Optical Performance Test & Analysis of Intraocular
tion design and by the presence of a central refractive Lenses [dissertation]. Tucson, AZ, University of Arizona,
2008;; 5354
multifocal zone. 12. Piers PA, Weeber HA, Norrby S, inventors; AMO Groningen BV,
The analytical definition of the diffraction efficiency assignee, Multifocal ophthalmic lens. US patent 7 670 371. March
described in this article, in combination with a Zemax 2, 2010. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/
ray-tracing program for retinal image quality calcula- 7670371/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
13. Alfonso JF, Ferna  ndez-Vega L, Puchades C, Monte s-Mico
 R.
tion, assisted in optimizing the light split in the apod-
Intermediate visual function with different multifocal intraocular
ization of the OptiVis multifocal IOL by minimizing lens models. J Cataract Refract Surg 2010; 36:733739
the areas of the lens where the light split between far 14. Fiala W, inventor; Bifocon Optics GmbH, assignee. Multifocal
and near is similar and the light loss is the largest. lens exhibiting diffractive and refractive powers. US patent 6
536 899. March 25, 2003. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.
us/patents/6536899/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
REFERENCES 15. Lee CS, Simpson MJ, inventors; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., as-
1. Davison JA, Simpson MJ. History and development of the apo- signee. Diffractive multifocal ophthalmic lens. US patent 5 699
dized diffractive intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006; 142. December 16, 1997. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.
32:849858 us/patents/5699142/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
2. Cohen AL, inventor. Progressive intensity phase bifocal. US pat- 16. Portney V, inventor. Aspherical diffractive ophthalmic lens. US pat-
ent 4 881 805. November 21, 1989 and US patent 5 054 905. Oc- ent 7 073 906. July 11, 2006. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.
tober 8, 1991. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/ us/patents/7073906/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
5054905/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011 17. Portney V, inventor. Multifocal ophthalmic lens. US patent 5 225
3. Buralli DA, Morris GM. Effects of diffraction efficiency on the mod- 858. July 6, 1993. Available at: http://www.patentstorm.us/
ulation transfer function of diffractive lenses. Appl Opt 1992; patents/5225858/fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
31:43894396. Available at: http://www.creativedirectionsdesign. 18. Portney V, inventor. Multifocal ophthalmic lens with reduced
com/apollooptical/media/aos_technology/diffractive_lens_articles/ halo size. US patent 6 210 005. April 3, 2001; US patent 6 435
ao31_4389.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2011 681. August 20, 2002; and US patent 6 557 998. May 6, 2003.
4. Castignoles F, Flury M, Lepine T. Comparison of the efficiency, Available at: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6557998/
MTF and chromatic properties of four diffractive bifocal intraoc- fulltext.html. Accessed June 15, 2011
ular lens designs. Opt Express 2010; 18:52455256
5. OShea DC, Suleski TJ, Kathman AD, Prather DW. Diffractive OTHER CITED MATERIAL
Optics: Design, Fabrication, and Test. Bellingham, WA, Spie, A. Aaren Scientific, Inc. Ontario, CA, 1999-2011. Available at:
2004; (SPIE volume TT62) http://www.aareninc.com/domestic/index.html. Accessed June
6. London ~o C, Clark PP. Modeling diffraction efficiency effects 15, 2011
when designing hybrid diffractive lens systems. Appl Opt
1992; 31:22482252
7. Cohen AL. Practical design of a bifocal hologram contact lens or First author:
intraocular lens. Appl Opt 1992; 31:37503754
Valdemar Portney, PhD
8. Schwiegerling J. Intraocular lenses. In: Bass M, ed, Handbook of
Optics. Volume 3. Vision and Vision Optics, 3rd ed. New York, Medical device consulting firm,
NY, McGraw-Hill, 2010; 2111, 21.1621.17 Newport Coast, California, USA
9. Freeman MH, inventor; Pilkington P.E. Limited, assignee. Multi-
focal contact lenses unitizing diffraction and refraction. US pat-
ent 4 637 697. June 20, 1987. Available at: http://www.

J CATARACT REFRACT SURG - VOL 37, NOVEMBER 2011

You might also like