Sagittal height differences of disposable soft contact lenses

  • Stefano Giovanzana
  • Ştefan Ţălu
  • Simona Delia NicoarăEmail author
Original Paper



We aim to improve contact lens fitting by using an innovative and simple photogrammetry imaging system to find the sagittal height (SAG) of soft contact lenses.


Eleven different types of commercially available soft contact lenses were measured, and five different lenses per package of each lens type were evaluated. The lenses were inserted in a polymethyl methacrylate cell with parallel faces containing a solution of saline and fluorescein to improve the contrast against the background. For every lens, two photographs from the top view and five photographs from the side view were taken. Using homothetic transformations, we calculated the sagittal height.


The SAG of all lenses ranged from 3450 to 3907 μm. Differences can be appreciated between SAG of different materials. Performing an ANOVA test, we confirm that the intra-packaging sagitta is reliable for every lens. Comparing the measured SAG with the calculated spherical one, we confirm that the majority of lenses, eight out of eleven, have a spherical geometry for the internal side. Finally, we are able to group the type of lenses that present similar SAG apart from the data reported on the blister.


Optical coherence tomography measurement of the eye sagitta over a given chord helped finding the first lens to fit, because matching contact lens sagitta and ocular sagitta is the key for a good fitting. In our work, we found that the majority of brands use single sphere geometry for internal surface of disposable soft contact lenses.


Base curve radius Image analysis Lens fitting Sagittal height Soft contact lenses 



We thank Claudio Iovine (Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italia) and Marta Farioli (Ottica Benzoni, Malnate, Italia) for their help in finding the soft contact lenses on the market.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Ţălu SD (2005) Ophtalmologie—cours, medical publishing house. Iuliu Haţieganu, Cluj-NapocaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Childs A, Li H, Lewittes DM, Dong B, Liu W, Shu X, Sun C, Zhang HF (2016) Fabricating customized hydrogel contact lens. Sci Rep 6:34905. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ţălu Ş, Ţălu M, Giovanzana S, Shah R (2011) A brief history of contact lenses. HVM Bioflux 3(1):33–37Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Efron N (2010) Contact lens practice, 2nd edn. Butterworth Heinemann Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ţălu Ş (2013) Characterization of surface roughness of unworn hydrogel contact lenses at a nanometric scale using methods of modern metrology. Polym Eng Sci 53:2141–2150Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Douthwaite WA (2006) Contact lens optics and lens design, 3rd edn. Butterworth Heinemann Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ţălu Ş, Stępień K, Caglayan MO (2015) Topographic characterization of unworn contact lenses assessed by atomic force microscopy and wavelet transform. Microsc Res Tech 78:1026–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ţălu Ş, Stach S (2014) Multifractal characterization of unworn hydrogel contact lens surfaces. Polym Eng Sci 54:1066–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ţălu Ş (2012) Texture analysis methods for the characterisation of biological and medical images. ELBA Bioflux 4(1):8–12Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ţălu Ş, Bramowicz M, Kulesza S, Fiorillo I, Giovanzana S (2017) Fractal features and surface micromorphology of unworn surfaces of rigid gas permeable contact lenses. Curr Eye Res 42(8):1118–1123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Filipecki J, Sitarz M, Kocela A, Kotynia K, Jelen P, Filipecka K, Gaweda M (2014) Studying functional properties of hydrogel and silicone-hydrogel contact lenses with PALS, MIR and Raman spectroscopy. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc 131:686–690CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ţălu Ş (2012) Mathematical methods used in monofractal and multifractal analysis for the processing of biological and medical data and images. Anim Biol Anim Husb 4(1):1–4Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Young G (1992) Ocular sagittal height and soft contact lens fit. J BCLA 15:45–49Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Young G (2014) Mathematical model for evaluating soft contact lens fit. Optom Vis Sci 91:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van der Worp E (2010) A guide to scleral lens fitting. Pacific University, Forest GroveGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hall LA, Hunt C, Young G, Wolffsohn J (2013) Factors affecting corneoscleral topography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54:3691–3701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bibby MM (1979) Sagittal depth considerations in the selection of the base curve radius of a soft contact lens. Am J Optom Vis Sci 56:407–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hall LA, Young G, Wolffsohn JS, Riley C (2011) The influence of corneoscleral topography on soft contact lens fit. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:6801–6806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Young G, Schnider C, Hunt C, Efron S (2010) Corneal topography and soft contact lens fit. Optom Vis Sci 87:358–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sorbara L, Maram J, Fonn D, Woods C, Simpson T (2010) Metrics of the normal cornea: anterior segment imaging with the Visante OCT. Clin Exp Optom 93:150–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luhmann T, Robson S, Kyle SA, Harley IA (2007) Close range photogrammetry: principles, techniques and applications. Whittles, DunbeathGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ţălu Ş (2015) Micro and nanoscale characterization of three dimensional surfaces. Basics and applications. Napoca Star Publishing House, Cluj-NapocaGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Phillips AJ, Speedwell L (2018) Contact lenses e-book. Elsevier Health Sciences, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van der Worp E, Mertz C (2015) Sagittal height differences of frequent replacement silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Contact Lens Anterio 38:157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Studio Optometrico GiovanzanaMilanItaly
  2. 2.The Directorate of Research, Development and Innovation Management (DMCDI)The Technical University of Cluj-NapocaCluj-NapocaRomania
  3. 3.Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine“Iuliu Haţieganu” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Cluj-NapocaCluj-NapocaRomania

Personalised recommendations