Wavefront Aberrations in Children and Young People with Myopia: Comparative Analysis of OPD Scan III and iTrace data

Individual ametropia-correcting products (glasses, contact lenses) selected using standard methods for studying refraction of the eye can provide high visual acuity, however, modern requirements of optical correction users do not always allow achieving the desired quality of vision. The quality of vision is influenced by many factors related to the conditions of the accommodative apparatus, the ocular surface, and the wavefront. The eye wavefront is a characteristic of the eye’s optical system that describes the phase distribution of a light wave after it passes through the cornea, lens, and other optical media of the eye. In an ideal optical system (without aberrations), the wavefront has a flat shape, which ensures that light is focused at a single point on the retina. However, the real optical system of the eye is subject to distortions, which are determined by aberrations — deviations of the wavefront shape from the ideal one. Aberrometry has been widely used in optometry and many areas of ophthalmology in recent decades (for the diagnosis of keratoconus, refractive surgery, and dry eye syndrome). Currently, there is no single standard for measuring eye aberrations, so it is necessary to regularly evaluate the consistency of aberrometer data to ensure the reliability of wavefront data.

Purpose: to provide a number of technical and practical parameters that may be useful when choosing an aberrometer for daily clinical practice, as well as to evaluate and compare the general and internal aberrations measured by two aberrometers: the OPD Scan III optical media analyzer (OPD Scan, Nidek) and the ray tracing technology aberrometer (iTrace, Tracey Technology).

Patients and methods. This study included 30 patients with 60 eyes. Total and internal aberrations were compared with pupil diameters of 3 mm and 6 mm. These parameters, along with the refraction parameters, were analyzed and supplemented with paired t-criteria.

Results. A comparison of the two OPD Scan III and iTrace devices showed that their measurement results of total aberrations at pupil diameters of 3 mm and 6 mm are comparable. Thus, both devices can be used to study wavefront changes in children and young patients with myopia with the same degree of reliability. Differences in data on higher-order internal aberrations obtained from studies of children and young patients with myopia should be taken into account, among other things, when analyzing corneal aberrations (since they are calculated by subtracting the internal aberration index from the total eye aberration index) in these categories of patients.

1. Wang L, Koch DD. Ocular higher-order aberrations in individuals screened for refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:1896–1903.

2. Gifford P, Swarbrick HA. Repeatability of internal aberrometry with a new simultaneous capture aberrometer/corneal topographer. Optom Vis Sci. 2012 Jun;89(6): 929–938. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31825017c4.

3. Zadok D, Levy Y, Segal O, Barkana Y, Morad Y, Avni I. Ocular higher-order aberrations in myopia and skiascopic wavefront repeatability. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Jun;31(6):1128–1132. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.10.075.

4. Kozhaya K, Mehanna CJ, Asroui L, Bejjani R, Arba-Mosquera S, Mousa HM, Al-Ulloom SB, Awwad ST. Non-corneal Intraocular Higher Order Aberrations in Eyes With Keratoconus Versus Normal Myopic Eyes. J Refract Surg. 2025 Mar;41(3):e189–e198. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20250103-02.

5. Courville CB, Smolek MK, Klyce SD. Contribution of the ocular surface to visual optics. Exp Eye Res. 2004 Mar;78(3):417–425. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2003.10.012.

6. Charman WN. Wavefront aberration of the eye: a review. Optometry & Vision Science 1991;68:574–583. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199108000-00002.

7. Thibos LN, Hong X, Bradley A, Cheng X. Statistical variation of aberration structure and image quality in a normal population of healthy eyes. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 2002;19:2329–2348. doi: 10.1364/josaa.19.002329.

8. Cheng X, Himebaugh NL, Kollbaum PS et al. Test-retest reliability of clinical Shack-Hartmann measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:351–360. doi: 10.1167/iovs.03-0265.

9. Chen Y, Xia X. Comparison of the Orbscan II topographer and the iTrace aberrometer for the measurements of keratometry and corneal diameter in myopic patients. BMC Ophthalmol. 2016 Mar 31;16:33. doi: 10.1186/s12886-016-0210-8.

10. Mirshahi A, Buhren J, Gerhardt D, Kohnen T. In vivo and in vitro repeatability of Hartmann-Shack aberrometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:2295–2301. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(03)00655-2.

11. Rozema JJ, Van Dyck DE, Tassignon MJ. Clinical comparison of 6 aberrometers Part 2: Statistical comparison in a test group. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006;32:33–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.11.052.

12. Liang CL, Juo SH, Chang CJ. Comparison of higher-order wavefront aberrations with 3 aberrometers. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:2153–156. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.04.040.

13. Won JB, Kim SW, Kim EK, Ha BJ, Kim TI. Comparison of internal and total optical aberrations for 2 aberrometers: iTrace and OPD scan. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2008 Dec;22(4):210–213. doi: 10.3341/kjo.2008.22.4.210.

14. Liu RJ, Ma BK, Gao YF, Liu YY, Qi H. Evaluations of wavefront aberrations and corneal surface regularity in dry eye patients measured with OPD Scan III. Int J Ophthalmol 2022; 15(3):407–412. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2022.03.06.

15. Yue X, Yang Y, Chen S, Dai H. Statistical optimal parameters obtained by using clinical human ocular aberrations for high-precision aberration measurement. Int Ophthalmol. 2024 Jun 28;44(1):292. doi: 10.1007/s10792-024-03176-9.

16. Gomes J, Sapkota K, Franco S. Central and peripheral ocular high‐order aberrations and their relationship with accommodation and refractive error — a review. Vision. 2023;7:19. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision7010019.

17. Nguyen MT, Berntsen DA. Aberrometry Repeatability and Agreement with Autorefraction. Optom Vis Sci. 2017 Sep;94(9):886–893. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001107.

18. Gupta V, Bari A, Anjum S, Yadav A, Saxena R, Sinha R. Quantifying natural higher order aberration(s) in emmetropic human eyes and objectively evaluating retinal image quality. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2025 May;45(3):769–778. doi: 10.1111/ opo.13456.

19. Cade F, Cruzat A, Paschalis EI, Espírito Santo L, Pineda R. Analysis of four aberrometers for evaluating lower and higher order aberrations. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54990. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054990.

20. Unterhorst HA, Rubin A. Ocular aberrations and wavefront aberrometry: a review. Afr Vision Eye Health. 2015;74:21. https://doi.org/10.4102/aveh.v74i1.21.

21. Brown CE, Waring GO 4th, Rocha KM. Redefining vision assessment. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2020;31:225–233. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000664.

22. Ao MX, Zhang Y, Wang YQ, Zhao JX, Hu FR, Mandan DTY, Chen YG. [Analysis of peripheral retinal defocus and wavefront aberrations in children with unilateral myopic anisometropia]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2025 May 11;61(5):367–375. Chinese. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112142-20241010-00442.

23. Tarutta EP, Katargina LA, Harutunyan SG, Egiyan NS,Tarasova NA, Kruglova TB. Wavefront aberrations in Marfan syndrome over time after refractive surgery. Russian pediatric ophthalmology. 2025;20(1):14–19. doi: 10/17816/rpoj643132 EDN:GUCLSD.