One-year eye-to-eye comparison of wavefront-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis in hyperopes

Christopher S Sáles, Edward E Manche, Christopher S Sáles, Edward E Manche

Abstract

Background: To compare wavefront (WF)-guided and WF-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in hyperopes with respect to the parameters of safety, efficacy, predictability, refractive error, uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and higher order aberrations.

Methods: Twenty-two eyes of eleven participants with hyperopia with or without astigmatism were prospectively randomized to receive WF-guided LASIK with the VISX CustomVue S4 IR or WF-optimized LASIK with the WaveLight Allegretto Eye-Q 400 Hz. LASIK flaps were created using the 150-kHz IntraLase iFS. Evaluations included measurement of uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, <5% and <25% contrast sensitivity, and WF aberrometry. Patients also completed a questionnaire detailing symptoms on a quantitative grading scale.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for any of the variables studied after 12 months of follow-up (all P>0.05).

Conclusion: This comparative case series of 11 subjects with hyperopia showed that WF-guided and WF-optimized LASIK had similar clinical outcomes at 12 months.

Keywords: LASIK; hyperopic; wavefront.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of WF-guided LASIK and WF-optimized LASIK standard graphs. Notes: (A) Uncorrected visual acuity outcomes of WF-guided LASIK at 12 months. (B) Uncorrected visual acuity outcomes of WF-optimized LASIK at 12 months. (C) Change in corrected distance visual acuity after WF-guided LASIK at 12 months. (D) Change in corrected distance visual acuity after WF-optimized LASIK at 12 months. (E) Distribution of achieved spherical equivalent outcomes after WF-guided LASIK at 12 months. (F) Distribution of achieved spherical equivalent outcomes after WF-optimized LASIK at 12 months. Abbreviations: CDVA, corrected distance visual acuity; D, diopter; LASIK, laser in situ keratomileusis; Preop, preoperative; Postop, postoperative; UDVA, uncorrected distance visual acuity; WF, wavefront.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of WF-guided LASIK and WF-optimized LASIK standard graphs, continued. Notes: (A) Spherical equivalent refractive accuracy after WF-guided LASIK at 12 months. (B) Spherical equivalent refractive accuracy after WF-optimized LASIK at 12 months. (C) Refractive astigmatism after WF-guided LASIK at 12 months. (D) Refractive astigmatism after WF-optimized LASIK at 12 months. (E) Stability of spherical equivalent refraction after WF-guided LASIK between 1 and 12 months. (F) Stability of spherical equivalent refraction after WF-optimized LASIK between 1 and 12 months. The number of eyes is shown in brackets. Abbreviations: D, diopter; LASIK, laser in situ keratomileusis; Preop, preoperative; Postop, postoperative; SD, standard deviation; WF, wavefront.

References

    1. Nanba A, Amano S, Oshika T, et al. Corneal higher order wavefront aberrations after hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg. 2005;21:46–51.
    1. Llorente L, Barbero S, Merayo J, Marcos S. Total and corneal optical aberrations induced by laser in situ keratomileusis for hyperopia. J Refract Surg. 2004;20:203–216.
    1. Hersh PS, Fry K, Blaker JW. Spherical aberration after laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy. Clinical results and theoretical models of etiology. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29:2096–2104.
    1. Llorente L, Barbero S, Cano D, Dorronsoro C, Marcos S. Myopic versus hyperopic eyes: axial length, corneal shape and optical aberrations. J Vis. 2004;4:288–298.
    1. Desai RU, Jain A, Manche EE. Long-term follow-up of hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis correction using the Star S2 excimer laser. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:232–237.
    1. Chan A, Manche EE. Effect of preoperative pupil size on quality of vision after wavefront-guided LASIK. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:736–741.
    1. Golas L, Manche EE. Dry eye after laser in situ keratomileusis with femtosecond laser and mechanical keratome. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:1476–1480.
    1. Manche EE, Haw WW. Wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) versus wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (Prk): a prospective randomized eye-to-eye comparison (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis) Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2011;109:201–220.
    1. Durrie DS, Smith RT, Waring GO, 4th, Stahl JE, Schwendeman FJ. Comparing conventional and wavefront-optimized LASIK for the treatment of hyperopia. J Refract Surg. 2010;26:356–363.
    1. Keir NJ, Simpson T, Hutchings N, Jones L, Fonn D. Outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis for hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:886–893.
    1. Brint SF. Higher order aberrations after LASIK for myopia with Alcon and wavelight lasers: a prospective randomized trial. J Refract Surg. 2005;21:S799–S803.
    1. Moshirfar M, Betts BS, Churgin DS, et al. A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight (R) Allegretto Wave (R) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue STAR S4 IR in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011;5:1339–1347.
    1. Padmanabhan P, Mrochen M, Basuthkar S, Viswanathan D, Joseph R. Wavefront-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis: contralateral comparative study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:389–397.
    1. Tran DB, Shah V. Higher order aberrations comparison in fellow eyes following IntraLase LASIK with wavelight allegretto and custom cornea LADArvision4000 systems. J Refract Surg. 2006;22:S961–S964.
    1. Bababeygy SR, Zoumalan CI, Chien FY, Manche EE. Wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis retreatment for consecutive hyperopia and compound hyperopic astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:1260–1266.
    1. Chen S, Feng Y, Stojanovic A, Jankov MR, 2nd, Wang Q. IntraL-ase femtosecond laser vs mechanical microkeratomes in LASIK for myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Refract Surg. 2012;28:15–24.
    1. Zhang ZH, Jin HY, Suo Y, et al. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical microkeratome laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia: metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:2151–2159.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren