Question

What are impression-based scleral lenses?

Instead of choosing from trial lenses, the fitter takes a mold of the front of your eye and has a lens made to match it. Here's how that works and what the evidence shows.

By the Scleral Lens Team · Last reviewed October 2, 2026 · 7 published sources cited

The short answer

An impression-based scleral lens is made from a physical mold of the front of your eye. The mold is scanned in 3D and a lens is cut to match its shape, including bumps or irregular areas on the white of the eye. EyePrintPRO is the best-known example. Studies from a few clinics report better vision and successful wear in many people who couldn't wear standard scleral lenses, though adverse symptoms and refits do occur.

Key points

  • The lens is built from a 3D scan of a mold of your eye, not chosen from a trial set.
  • It's mainly used when standard scleral lenses haven't fit, for example around surgical sites or very irregular eye surfaces.
  • In one multicenter review, 29 of 44 patients had already tried standard scleral lenses without success.
  • Evidence comes from small retrospective studies; complications and reprints are reported.

How an impression-based lens is made

Most scleral lenses are fitted with trial lenses: your fitter places lenses of known shape on your eye, watches how they sit, and orders a lens with adjustments. An impression-based lens takes a different route. The fitter takes an impression of the front surface of your eye. That mold is scanned with a 3D scanner, and the lens is cut on a lathe to match it.[1]

Because the lens is shaped from your actual eye surface, it can follow features that standard designs struggle with, such as raised areas on the white of the eye or the bump of a glaucoma drainage device. EyePrintPRO is the best-known system.[1]

Who it’s for

Impression-based lenses are usually a second-line option. In a review of 44 patients (70 eyes) at three specialty practices, 29 patients had already tried standard scleral lenses without success.[2] In a single-center study of 95 eyes, reasons for wear included irregular corneas, ocular surface disease, exposure of the cornea, neurotrophic keratitis, and features beyond the cornea, such as glaucoma drainage devices, that prevented a standard lens from fitting.[3]

They’re also not common. In a survey of 423 practitioners who fit scleral lenses for keratoconus, those who had impression-based technology used it for a median of 8% of their fits, and most fits overall were done with trial lenses.[5]

What the studies show

All of the published studies are small and look back at patient records.

  • Vision. Vision improved significantly compared with patients’ previous correction in the multicenter review.[2] In the 95-eye study, median vision improved from about 20/94 to about 20/24.[3] A smaller study of 14 eyes found average vision improved from 20/36 to 20/21.[4]
  • Fit. In the multicenter review, ideal alignment on the white of the eye was achieved in 74% of fits and complete clearance of the limbus in 83%. Completing the fitting took an average of 4 visits.[2]
  • After failed scleral lenses. Of 56 eyes that had previously failed standard scleral lenses, 49 continued wearing impression-based lenses.[3]
  • Efficiency. Practitioners surveyed reported a median of 15 minutes to take impressions, and said the first impression was adequate to order a lens a median of 90% of the time. The time for the first visit and the number of lenses ordered were similar across trial-lens, scan-based, and impression-based fitting.[6]

Impression-based lenses can also be combined with advanced optics. One case report described adding wavefront-guided optics to an impression-based lens for a man with keratoconus, improving his vision by two lines in each eye.[7] See wavefront-guided scleral lenses.

Where they fall short

Impression-based lenses don’t remove the usual challenges of scleral lens wear. In the 95-eye study, one third of eyes (33.1%) developed adverse symptoms during wear and 16% developed adverse signs. Lens wear stopped in 10.5% of eyes, and 14.7% needed a new impression and lens.[3] Two eyes in the multicenter review stopped wearing because of complications.[2]

Not every practice has the equipment to offer them, which can mean travel. If standard lenses haven’t worked, other routes include a refit with a toric or custom landing zone, a profilometry-guided design, or PROSE. For more on next steps, see what if scleral lenses don’t work for me?

Common questions

Does taking the impression hurt?

Ask your fitter what to expect and whether they use numbing drops. A soft, putty-like material is used to take a mold of the front of your eye. If you're anxious about it, say so beforehand so they can talk you through each step.

Is an impression-based lens better than a regular scleral lens?

Not for everyone. Most people are fitted successfully with standard scleral lenses chosen from trial lenses. Impression-based lenses are mainly used when the eye's surface is too irregular for a standard design, or when standard lenses haven't worked.

Will I need more than one impression?

Sometimes. In one study, about one in seven eyes needed the lens remade from a new impression. Your fitter will tell you if the first lens needs adjusting or a new mold.

Keep reading

What is scleral profilometry?

Scleral profilometry is an imaging scan that measures the height and shape of your cornea and the surrounding white of the eye. Fitters can use the map to design a scleral lens, including a landing zone shaped to match an uneven sclera. Studies so far show it can work, with fitting effort similar to traditional trial-lens fitting, but it doesn't replace a fitter's judgment. Most scleral lenses are still fitted with trial lenses.

What is a toric landing zone?

The landing zone is the outer ring of a scleral lens that rests on the white of the eye. Many eyes are steeper in some directions than others, so a lens with an evenly curved landing zone can press harder in some spots and lift in others. A toric landing zone is curved differently in two directions to match that shape, and quadrant-specific or fully custom landing zones go further. In small studies, toric landing zones reduced lens flexing and rotation and improved tear exchange.

What is PROSE treatment?

PROSE is a customized scleral lens treatment from BostonSight, based in Needham, Massachusetts. The device itself is a scleral lens: a gas permeable dome filled with saline that vaults over the cornea and rests on the white of the eye. What sets PROSE apart is its proprietary design software and a structured treatment program with intensive training. It's mainly used for people with severe ocular surface disease or irregular corneas who haven't done well with other options.

What are wavefront-guided scleral lenses?

A standard scleral lens corrects most of the blur from an irregular cornea, but some optical distortions, called higher-order aberrations, can remain. A wavefront-guided scleral lens measures those leftover distortions through your settled lens and builds a custom correction into its front surface. In a small randomized crossover trial, these lenses reduced leftover distortions by about half and improved vision by a line or more in most eyes. They are still uncommon and not every eye gains.

Sources

  1. Son HS, Friedrich M, Jun AS, Soiberman US. Advancements and innovations in keratoconus management: a review of current practices. J Clin Med. 2025;14(21):7491. doi:10.3390/jcm14217491 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  2. Nau A, Shorter ES, Harthan JS, et al. Multicenter review of impression-based scleral devices. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2021;44(5):101380. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2020.10.010 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  3. Silverman JIM, Huffman JM, Zimmerman MB, Ling JJ, Greiner MA. Indications for wear, visual outcomes, and complications of custom imprint 3D scanned scleral contact lens use. Cornea. 2021;40(5):596-602. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000002588 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  4. Nguyen MTB, Thakrar V, Chan CC. EyePrintPRO therapeutic scleral contact lens: indications and outcomes. Can J Ophthalmol. 2018;53(1):66-70. doi:10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.07.026 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  5. Fogt JS, Schornack M, Nau C, et al. Image- and impression-based technology in scleral lens fitting for keratoconus: availability and utilization. Eye Contact Lens. 2024;50(7):292-296. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000001100 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  6. Shorter E, Fogt J, Nau C, et al. Image- and impression-based technology for scleral lens fitting for keratoconus: efficiency of the fitting process. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2024;47(5):102174. doi:10.1016/j.clae.2024.102174 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  7. Gelles JD, Cheung B, Akilov S, et al. Ocular impression-based scleral lens with wavefront-guided optics for visual improvement in keratoconus. Eye Contact Lens. 2022;48(11):485-488. doi:10.1097/ICL.0000000000000922 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Last updated October 2, 2026. Found an error or a newer study? Let us know and we'll correct the page.