Refractive index of the crystalline lens in young and aged eyes

Abstract

Background: When the ageing crystalline lens is modelled on the basis of a constant equivalent lens, the changes in ocular dimensions would lead to an increase in power of the order of two dioptres. A comparable increase in myopia is usually not evident with increasing age and this inconsistency has been referred to as the lens paradox. It has been proposed that this paradox can be resolved if the refractive index is modelled as a gradient refractive index. The purpose of this paper was to study differences in the equivalent, gradient and surface refractive index of the crystalline lens between a young and old age group.Methods: Biometric data was collected for 96 subjects: 48 young adults with an age range 19 to 31 years (mean 22.10 ± 2.93 years) and 48 old adults with an age range 49 to 61 years (mean 53.88 ± 3.88 years). The equivalent refractive index was determined for each subject by paraxial ray tracing and a merit function based on refractive error and Purkinje image height. The refractive index gradient was determined by modelling the crystalline lens as a bi‐elliptical iso‐indicial structure in a three‐surface Gullstrand‐Emsley schematic eye and a merit function based on the surface power, the gradient refractive index power and the equivalent power of the lens. The central refractive index of the lens was assumed to be 1.406.Results: The differences between the groups included a decrease in the mean equivalent refractive index from 1.427 ± 0.007 to 1.418 ± 0.006, an increase in surface refractive index from 1.386 ± 0.007 to 1.394 ± 0.006 with a concurrent change in the gradient refractive index profile. The refractive index changes maintained a constant mean lens power in each group.Conclusions: The so‐called ‘lens paradox’ whereby an increase in the power of the crystalline lens does not lead to an increase in myopia is resolved by a decrease in the equivalent refractive index of the lens or when modelled as a gradient refractive index structure, by an increase in the surface refractive index and an associated change in gradient for an assumed central refractive index of 1.406.