Clear lens extraction with intraocular lens followed by photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis

OBJECTIVE: To study photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) after clear lens extraction (CLE) with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation for hyperopia or astigmatism. DESIGN: Retrospective, noncomparative interventional case series. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-five eyes (55 subjects) had CLE with posterior chamber IOL implants for hyperopia up to 12.25 diopters (D); 31 eyes were retreated with PRK, and 34 eyes were retreated with LASIK for residual ametropias. INTERVENTION: For PRK and LASIK, the refractive surgery was performed with the slit-scanning excimer laser Nidek EC-5000, Nidek Co., Tokyo, Japan. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Manifest refraction, best-spectacle and uncorrected Snellen visual acuity, haze, and halos were evaluated before surgery and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative. RESULTS: Forty-seven eyes were evaluated at the 12-month postoperative examination: 96% of these eyes had spherical equivalents (SE) within +/-2 D of emmetropia, 79% of eyes had SE within +/-1 D of emmetropia and 51% of eyes had SE within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. Eighty-five percent of the eyes at 12 months postoperative had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better, and 46% of eyes had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better. Eighty-seven percent of the eyes at 12 months postoperative had uncorrected visual acuity within 1 Snellen line of their initial best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) before all treatment. No eye lost 2 Snellen lines of BSCVA at 3, 6, or 12 months after PRK or after LASIK. CONCLUSIONS: IOL implantation for CLE, although an invasive technique, resulted in better refractive outcomes without laser-related clinical complications after PRK or LASIK adjustment.     

Randomized bilateral comparison of excimer laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for 2.50 to 8.00 diopters of myopia

OBJECTIVE: To compare effectiveness, safety, and stability of excimer laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for low-to-moderate myopia. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, bilateral study. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-three patients with a manifest refraction of -2.50 to -8.00 diopters (D) participated. INTERVENTION: For each patient, one eye received LASIK and the other received PRK. The first eye treated, and surgical method in the first eye, were randomized. Both eyes were treated by the same surgeon during the same operative session with a Summit Omnimed I laser (6-mm-diameter ablation) and a Chiron Automated Corneal Shaper. Follow-up was 90% at 1 and 2 years. RESULTS: At baseline, mean (+/-standard deviation) spherical equivalent manifest refraction was -4.80 +/- 1.60 D in LASIK-treated eyes and -4.70 +/- 1.50 D in PRK-treated eyes. At 1 day after surgery, 81% of patients (21 eyes) reported no pain in the LASIK-treated eye, whereas no patient (0%) reported being pain-free in the PRK-treated eye. At 3 to 4 days after surgery, 18 (80%) LASIK-treated eyes either improved or remained within 1 line of baseline spectacle-corrected visual acuity; only 10 (45%) PRK-treated eyes achieved this result. At 2 years after surgery, 18 (61%) LASIK- and 10 (36%) PRK-treated eyes achieved an uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, with no statistically significant difference in refractive outcome between the two techniques. Quantitative videokeratography showed more regularity after LASIK. Complications were similar in the two groups. Patients preferred LASIK by a margin of 2 to 1 at 1 year but showed no preference at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Using a 6-mm-diameter single-pass, large area ablation and an automated microkeratome to treat myopia of -2.50 to -8.00 D with 1.00 D or less astigmatism in 1994, the authors used LASIK to produce a higher percentage of eyes with an uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, more regular postoperative corneal topography, less postoperative pain, and more rapid recovery of baseline spectacle-corrected visual acuity than PRK. Both LASIK and PRK achieved successful correction of low-to-moderate myopia at 1 and 2 years after surgery.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis versus photorefractive keratectomy in the correction of myopic astigmatism

PURPOSE: To evaluate retrospectively the effectiveness of astigmatism correction in eyes treated with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: Patients with low to moderate myopia with astigmatism ranging from +0.25 to +4.50 diopters were included in the study. PRK was performed on 62 eyes and LASIK on 70 eyes. Six-month data were analyzed with regard to astigmatism power, astigmatism axis, spherical equivalent, uncorrected visual acuity, vector astigmatism change, and topographic corneal regularity. RESULTS: Mean astigmatism magnitude change was 0.54 +/- 0.76 in PRK-treated eyes and 0.60 +/- 0.67 in LASIK-treated eyes (61% versus 64% change, respectively, p = 0.61) at 6 months after surgery. Mean spherical correction change was -2.79 +/- 1.51 for PRK and -2.90 +/- 1.03 for LASIK (p = 0.63). Mean spherical equivalent change was -2.5 +/- 1.57 for PRK and -2.6 +/- 1.23 for LASIK (p = 0.73). Mean change in astigmatism axis was 20.8 +/- 73.1 for PRK and 33.8 +/- 81.7 for LASIK (p = 0.34). Mean change in uncorrected visual acuity (LogMar) was 0.84 +/- 0.26 for PRK and 0.89 +/- 0.23 for LASIK (p = 0.21). Mean vector-corrected astigmatism change was 0.88 +/- 0.66 for PRK and 0.95 +/- 0.59 for LASIK (p = 0.51). Mean vector-corrected astigmatism axis for PRK was 86.9 +/- 59 degrees and for LASIK 83.8 +/- -47.6 degrees (p = 0.75). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in astigmatism correction between PRK and LASIK at 6 months after surgery.     

Laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia with the autonomous laser

PURPOSE: To describe the refractive outcome, objective clinical data, and subjective patient experiences after laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. METHODS: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of 58 LASEK-treated eyes (36 patients) with myopia (with and without astigmatism) between -1.50 and -14.75 D (mean -7.80 +/- 2.90 D, median -7.90 D). Refractive surgery was performed using the Alcon Summit Autonomous LADAR Vision excimer laser. Manifest refraction, best-spectacle and uncorrected Snellen visual acuity, stability of refraction, and corneal haze were evaluated before surgery and up to 6 months after surgery. A group of randomly selected LASIK-treated eyes were compared at each time point. RESULTS: Patients who opted for monovision (n=12) were excluded. In the emmetropia targeted eyes (n=46), 45%, 83%, 85%, and 89% achieved 20/40 or better uncorrected Snellen visual acuity (UCVA) at 1 day, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 1 month respectively. At 6 months, 73% (n=28) of eyes treated achieved UCVA 20/20 with 97% achieving 20/40 or better (mean, -0.51 D). At 3 and 6 months, 71% (n=46) and 68% (n=28) were within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia. The percentage of eyes that achieved UCVA 20/40 or better at 6 months was 97% (n=28). Visually significant corneal haze was evident in two LASEK-treated patients (four eyes) at 6 months. No eyes lost two or more lines of best spectacle-corrected Snellen visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggest that LASEK appears to be a safe, effective, and comparable alternative to LASIK, even for higher amounts of myopia. A prospective, randomized clinical trial is needed to better define the role of LASEK as it compares to other refractive procedures, specifically LASIK and PRK.     

Comparison of laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for the correction of myopia of -6.00 diopters or less. Melbourne Excimer Laser Group

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) compared to photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for the correction of low or moderate myopia (-0.50 to -6.00 D) at 6 months after surgery. METHODS: The study population comprised a non-randomized consecutive series of 622 eyes of 392 patients who were treated with the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser. LASIK was performed using the ACS Chiron microkeratome on 314 eyes and surface PRK on 308 eyes. All patients were treated using a standard protocol, then assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of the LASIK group and 67% of the PRK group attended their 6-month examination. Eighty percent of patients (111 eyes) after LASIK and 65% (136 eyes) after PRK had an uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better. Spherical equivalent refraction was within +/-0.50 D of intended refraction in 78% (109 eyes) for LASIK and 82% (170 eyes) for PRK. Loss of two more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity at 6 months occurred in 1.4% (2 eyes) of the LASIK group and 1.0% (2 eyes) of the PRK group. CONCLUSION: At 1 month follow-up, the percentage of eyes that achieved 20/20 uncorrected visual acuity was greater in the LASIK group than in the PRK group. At 6 months, visual and refractive outcomes of LASIK and PRK were similar. Although flap related complications occurred only after LASIK, the overall risk of loss of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not significantly greater than for PRK.     

Photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis for residual refractive error after phakic intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of combining phakic posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and excimer corneal surgery to treat high myopia or myopia with astigmatism. SETTING: Service d'Ophtalmologie, H?pital Purpan, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France. METHODS: Thirty-two eyes of 28 patients with extreme myopia or myopia combined with astigmatism were treated by implantation of a phakic posterior chamber IOL. Residual refractive errors were treated no earlier than 6 weeks after IOL implantation by photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in eyes with low refractive errors or by laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with higher residual refractive errors. RESULTS: The mean preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) refraction was -18.7 diopters (D). The refractive astigmatism ranged from 0 to 3.5 D. After excimer laser treatment, the SE refraction ranged from -0.5 to -2.5 D and the refractive astigmatism, from 0 to 1.5 D in the PRK group. In the LASIK group, spherical ametropia ranged from -1.5 to +1.5 D and astigmatism, from 0 to 1.0 D. After excimer laser treatment, the uncorrected visual acuity improved in all eyes but a loss of 1 line of the corrected vision after IOL implantation occurred in 22.2% of PRK-treated eyes and in 13.6% of LASIK-treated eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Bioptic treatment of extreme myopia and myopia associated with astigmatism appears to be safer and more predictable than other methods of treatment.     

Recovery of uncorrected visual acuity after laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy for low myopia

PURPOSE: To compare uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) between 1 week and 6 months after surgery. METHODS: All eyes underwent PRK or LASIK with the VisX StarS2 excimer laser. We retrospectively analyzed data from 77 random eyes of 77 patients in the PRK group and 76 eyes of 76 patients in the LASIK group. All eyes had a low myopic refractive error (spherical equivalent range, -0.88 diopters (D) to -5.13 D; mean PRK. -2.8 +/- 0.20 D: LASIK, -2.5 +/- 0.22 D). Uncorrected visual acuity and manifest refractive error were evaluated 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: Each eye undergoing PRK was paired with an eye undergoing LASIK for a similar level of spherical equivalent. Mean uncorrected visual acuity after 1 week was 0.85 +/- 0.06 (20/25, logMAR 0.12 +/- 0.04) for the PRK group and 1.01 +/- 0.06 (20/20, logMAR 0.01 +/- 0.03) for the LASIK group (p < 0.001). Mean spherical equivalent after 1 week was 0.23 +/- 0.12 D for the PRK group and -0.02 +/- 0.07 D for the LASIK group (p = 0.02). Mean uncorrected visual acuity after 1 month was 1.03 +/- 0.05 (20/20, logMAR 0.02 +/- 0.03) for the PRK group and 1.05 +/- 0.05 (20/20. -0.02 +/- 0.03) for the LASIK group (p = 0.16). Mean spherical equivalent after I month was 0.19 +/- 0.10 D for the PRK group and -0.02 +/- 0.09 D for the LASIK group. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.02), but was unlikely to be clinically significant. Mean uncorrected visual acuity after 6 months was 1.05 +/- 0.06 (20/20, logMAR -0.01 +/- 0.03) for the PRK group and 1.06 +/- 0.05 (20/20, logMAR -0.14 +/- 0.03) for the LASIK group (p = 0.41). Mean spherical equivalent after 6 months was 0.02 +/- 0.08 D for the PRK group and 0.00 +/- 0.08 D for the LASIK group (p = 0.35). CONCLUSION: Uncorrected visual acuity 1 week after surgery is significantly better in eyes undergoing LASIK than in eyes undergoing PRK. Both procedures provide functional vision by 1 week after surgery. The difference does not relate to refractive error, which was similar between the two groups, but to differences in healing of the epithelium. By 1 month after surgery, there is no difference in mean uncorrected visual acuity between eyes that undergo PRK or LASIK for low myopia.     

One-year results of photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia using a 213 nm wavelength solid-state laser

PURPOSE: To study the long-term results of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in low to moderate myopic corrections using the Pulzar Z1 system (CustomVis), a 213 nm wavelength solid-state laser. SETTING: University refractive surgery center. METHODS: This prospective noncomparative case series comprised 20 patients (40 eyes) who had refractive surgery using the Pulzar Z1 laser system. Manifest refraction, uncorrected visual acuity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), safety, predictability, stability, and confocal microscopy images were evaluated. RESULTS: Ten patients (20 eyes) had PRK and 10 patients (20 eyes) had LASIK. The mean follow-up was 13.9 months +/- 1.1 (SD) (range 12 to 17 months) and 14.6 +/- 1.2 months (range 12 to 18 months) in the PRK group and LASIK group, respectively. No eye lost a line of Snellen BSCVA during the follow-up period; 2 eyes (10%) gained 2 Snellen lines. There was a statistically significant decrease in spherical equivalent manifest refraction postoperatively in both groups (P<.05). Refractive stability was obtained during the first postoperative month and remained stable during the follow-up period, with no significant changes between any interval in both groups (P>.05). At the last follow-up, 95% of all eyes were within +/-1.00 diopter of emmetropia. No late postoperative complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Refractive surgery using the Pulzar Z1 213 nm wavelength solid-state laser was a safe, effective procedure in the treatment of low to moderate myopia.     

Comparison of photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia of -6 D or less using the Nidek EC-5000 laser

PURPOSE: We compared the efficacy, predictability, and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the surgical correction of low and moderate myopia. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed to evaluate uncorrected and spectacle-corrected visual acuity, and manifest refraction 1 year after PRK or LASIK. All procedures were done using an automatic microkeratome (Chiron Ophthalmic) and the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser. RESULTS: PRK was performed in 75 eyes of 45 patients and LASIK in 133 eyes of 77 patients. Mean age for PRK patients was 32.8 years (range, 18 to 52 yr) and LASIK patients was 29.6 years (range, 18 to 49 yr). Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction for PRK patients was -3.28 D (range, -1.00 to -6.00 D) and LASIK, -3.86 D (range, -1.00 to -6.00 D). One year after surgery, mean spherical equivalent refraction for Group 1 (baseline, -1.00 to -3.00 D) PRK eyes was -0.18 +/- 0.61 D (range, -1.50 to +0.75 D) and for LASIK eyes, -0.08 +/- 0.61 D (range, -1.50 to +1.62 D), with no statistically significant difference. For Group 2 eyes (baseline, -3.25 to -6.00 D), mean spherical equivalent refraction for PRK eyes was -0.44 +/- 0.87 D (range, -2.00 to +2.12 D) and for LASIK eyes, -0.09 +/- 0.83 D (range, -1.50 to +1.75 D), with no statistically significant difference. The antilogarithm of the mean UCVA (antilogUCVA) in Group 1 for PRK was 0.79 +/- 0.21 (20/25) and for LASIK was 0.87 +/- 0.19 (20/23), with no statistically significant difference. The antilogUCVA in Group 2 for PRK eyes was 0.70 +/- 0.24 (20/28) and for LASIK eyes was 0.83 +/- 0.18 (20/24), with a statistically significant difference (0.7 vs. 0.83, P < .005). The percentage of eyes with a postoperative UCVA >20/40 in Group 1 for PRK was 91.5% (38 eyes) and for LASIK was 95% (50 eyes) (no statistically significant difference), and in Group 2 for PRK eyes, it was 82% (27 eyes) and 97.5% (78 eyes) for LASIK (statistically significant difference, P < .05). CONCLUSION: PRK and LASIK with the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser are effective and safe for correcting low to moderate myopia, but LASIK eyes showed better results for moderate myopia in terms of uncorrected visual acuity.     

Effect of expanding the treatment zone of the Nidek EC-5000 laser on laser in situ keratomileusis outcomes

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of expanding the treatment zone of the Nidek EC-5000 laser on postoperative visual acuity as well as night glare and halos after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using 4 ablation zone diameters. SETTING: Division of Ophthalmology, Evanston Northwestern Healthcare and Northwestern University Medical School, Glenview, Illinois, USA. METHODS: This prospective study comprised 301 eyes of 154 consecutive patients who had LASIK in 1 or both eyes using the Nidek EC-5000 laser by 1 surgeon with experience in keratomileusis and excimer laser refractive surgery. A 6.5 mm optical zone was used with a transition zone 1.0 mm larger than the pupil under scotopic conditions (7.5, 8.0, 8.5, or 9.0 mm). Targeted correction was calculated according to a customized clinical nomogram. All patients were queried about glare and halos preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively using a questionnaire assigning numeric values to the degree of perceived visual disturbance (0 = no glare or halos, 1 = minimal, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe). RESULTS: The baseline uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 20/200 or worse in 293 eyes. The baseline best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better. The mean preoperative refractive sphere was -6.33 diopters (D) +/- 2.80 (SD) (range -1.00 to -16.25 D) and the mean preoperative refractive cylinder, 0.86 +/- 0.83 D (range 0 to +3.25 D). Three months postoperatively, 78% of eyes had a UCVA of 20/20 and 99%, of 20/40 or better. Preoperatively, 94 eyes (31%) had glare and halos. At 3 months, glare, halos, or both were present in 19 eyes of 11 patients (6.3%) (P<.0001); in 14 eyes, patients reported less severe glare and halos postoperatively than preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a peripheral transition zone 1.0 mm larger than the pupil under scotopic conditions resulted in a low incidence of glare and halos postoperatively and did not adversely affect visual acuity. There was no increase in postoperative complications including corneal ectasia.     

Multipass versus single pass photorefractive keratectomy for high myopia using a scanning laser.

PURPOSE: To study photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for high myopia using the Nidek EC-5000 slit scanning laser and to compare a single pass versus a multipass ablation approach. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 95 eyes (64 patients; range -10.00 to -27.00 D; mean -12.00 D) treated for high myopia using PRK with a single or multipass technique. Forty-two eyes were treated with the single pass technique and 53 eyes were treated with the multipass technique. RESULTS: Twelve months after PRK, 79.4% (27 eyes) of the multipass group and 48.1% (13 eyes) of the single pass group were within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia; 32.4% (11 eyes) of multipass eyes and 29.6% (8 eyes) of single pass eyes were within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. Uncorrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better was reached by 85.3% (29 eyes) and 20/20 or better was reached by 55.9% (19 eyes) in the multipass group at 12 months postoperatively. For the single pass group, 74.1% (20 eyes) achieved 20/40 uncorrected and 18.5% (5 eyes) achieved 20/20 uncorrected visual acuity. No multipass-treated eyes lost 2 lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity at 6 or 12 months postoperatively. Mean regression between 1 to 12 months after PRK was 0.46 D for the multipass group and 1.45 D for the single pass group. Most of the regression occurred within the first 6 months after surgery in both techniques. CONCLUSION: These PRK results showed that treating high myopia using the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser combined with a multipass approach generated good refractive outcomes with no complications. Undercorrections with the single pass technique could be compensated for with new nomograms. The multipass technique resulted in less regression and better refractive outcomes.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for residual myopia after photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopic regression and undercorrection after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). SETTING: The Eye Institute, Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Fifty eyes of 32 patients were treated by LASIK for residual myopia following primary PRK. The mean spherical equivalent refraction (SEQ) was -2.92 diopters (D) +/- 1.57 (SD) (range -0.75 to -7.88 D). The mean refractive cylinder was 0.96 +/- 0.74 D (range 0 to 3.50 D). For analysis, the eyes were divided into 2 groups: those with 0 or low corneal haze (Group 1) and those with severe corneal haze (Group 2). In Group 1, the SEQ was -1.99 +/- 0.79 D (range -0.75 to -3.75 D) and in Group 2, -3.77 +/- 1.62 D (range -0.75 to -7.90 D). The procedure was performed using the Chiron Automated Corneal Shaper and the Summit Apex Plus laser. The mean interval between PRK and LASIK was 25 months (range 9 to 59 months). The following parameters were studied before and after LASIK retreatment: SEQ, mean refractive cylinder, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Complications after LASIK retreatment were evaluated. RESULTS: Six months after LASIK, the mean SEQ in all eyes was -0.65 +/- 0.86 D (range +1.50 to -3.35 D); 70.0% of eyes were within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia and the UCVA was 6/12 or better in 72.5%. The mean SEQ in Group 1 was -0.22 +/- 0.55 D (range -0.88 to -1.50 D) and in Group 2, -0.97+/- 0.92 D (range 0.12 to -3.25 D); the UCVA was 6/12 or better in 94.0% of eyes in Group 1 and in 56.0% in Group 2. No statistically significant between-group difference was found in lines of Snellen acuity lost or gained at 6 months. No eye lost more than 1 line of BCVA. CONCLUSIONS: Laser in situ keratomileusis appears to be a safe, effective, and predictable procedure for treating eyes with 0 or low haze with residual myopia after PRK. It is less predictable in eyes with severe haze.     

Improvement of visual acuity following refractive surgery for myopia and myopic anisometropia

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that anisometropic adults without significant amblyopia suffer from mild visual impairment probably due to aniseikonia, which might be improved by corneal refractive surgery. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients presenting with myopic anisometropia > or = 3.25 diopters (D) and 174 myopic controls appropriate for refractive surgery were included. Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or LASIK was performed on 57 anisometropic eyes. As 43 of the 174 myopic control patients had bilateral surgery, PRK or LASIK was performed on 217 myopic control eyes. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), refraction, and refractive correction were measured preoperatively and at 1, 3, 5 to 7, 8 to 13, and 25 months following surgery. RESULTS: Preoperative mean spherical equivalent was -7.20 +/- 2.40 D for anisometropic patients and -6.40 +/- 1.90 D for myopic patients. At 8 to 13 months postoperatively, when 23 (40%) anisometropic eyes and 94 (43%) myopic eyes were examined, the mean spherical equivalent refractions were -0.80 +/- 1.60 D and -0.30 +/- 0.60 D, respectively. Preoperatively, the mean BSCVA on a logMAR scale was -0.0143 +/- 0.0572 (Snellen 0.98 +/- 0.12) in the anisometropic group and 0.0136 +/- 0.0361 (Snellen 1.04 +/- 0.09) in the control group (P = .001). Eight to 13 months postoperatively, these values were 0.0076 +/- 0.0659 (Snellen 1.03 +/- 0.15) and 0.0495 +/- 0.0692 (Snellen 1.13 +/- 0.18) and this difference remained statistically significant (P = .012). For the myopic patients, the improvement in BSCVA reached almost maximum at 3 months, and this improvement was found to be highly significant 3 months after surgery (P = .001). The improvement in BSCVA was significantly slower for anisometropic patients and became statistically significant only after 8 to 13 months postoperatively (P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: Anisometropia reduces visual acuity in the more myopic eye and can be at least partially reversed by refractive correction. The slower improvement in BSCVA for anisometropic patients suggests plastic changes in the visual cortex following refractive surgery.     

Bilateral comparison of photorefractive keratectomy for myopia using two excimer lasers.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the results of excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in patients who underwent PRK using the Summit Apex (Omnimed) excimer laser in one eye and the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser in the other. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent PRK with the Summit Apex laser (Omnimed) in one eye and the Nidek laser (EC-5000) in the second and had at least 12 months of follow-up were included in this retrospective study (n=30). Uncorrected and spectacle-corrected visual acuity, final spherical equivalent refraction, and grade of subepithelial haze were compared. The average preoperative spherical equivalent refraction of eyes treated with the Summit laser was -6.00 D (range, -2.50 to -8.75 D), and for Nidek-treated eyes it was -5.57 D (range, -2.50 to -8.80 D). RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of Summit-treated eyes and 53% of Nidek-treated eyes had uncorrected visual acuity of 6/6 or better; 61% of Summit-treated eyes and 63% of Nidek-treated eyes had uncorrected visual acuity of 6/7.5 or better; 95% of Summit-treated eyes and 95% of Nidek-treated eyes had uncorrected visual acuity of 6/12 or better (difference not statistically significant). Seventy-three percent of eyes treated with the Summit laser and 80% of eyes treated with the Nidek laser had a postoperative refraction within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia; 97% of Summit-treated eyes and 87% of Nidek-treated eyes had a postoperative spherical equivalent refraction within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia; the difference between the two lasers was not statistically significant. However, the percent of eyes with persistent hyperopia was smaller in the Nidek group after 3 months (P=.0062) and after 6 months (P=.07) than in the Summit group. Videokeratography was not done. CONCLUSION: Both lasers were effective with relatively low side effects. No significant difference was found between the two lasers in postoperative uncorrected visual acuity or refractive outcome. Eyes operated with the Nidek laser had less persistent hyperopia and stabilized earlier.     

Visual, refractive, and subjective outcomes after photorefractive keratectomy for myopia of 6 to 10 diopters using the Nidek laser.

PURPOSE: To analyze the results of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for myopia of 6.0 to 10.0 diopters (D) using the Nidek laser and compare them with those in other series, including LASIK, and to analyze the subjective aspects of vision. SETTING: Remuera Eye Clinic, Auckland, New Zealand. METHOD: One hundred ninety-two eyes of 162 consecutive PRK patients with a 6 month follow-up were studied. All had myopia in the range of 6.0 to 10.0 D by spherical equivalent. Astigmatism of up to 3.5 D was treated by laser simultaneously. At 6 months, uncorrected visual acuity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, residual refractive error, and corneal haze were recorded. After the 6 month examination, a questionnaire was sent to all patients. RESULTS: Uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 was achieved in 59% of eyes and of 20/40 or better in 94%. The accuracy of correction was +/- 0.5 D of emmetropia in 77% and +/- 1.0 D in 94%. In 2 eyes (1.0%), corneal haze was assessed as 2+ and 2 Snellen lines of best corrected visual acuity were lost. The questionnaire revealed that 45% of patients had difficulties with night vision. This was better than before surgery in 35% but worse in 31%. Halos were seen around lights by 52%, but these were less than before surgery in 21% and worse in 26%. There was undue sensitivity to glare in 29%, but this was better than before surgery in 19% and worse in 28%. The overall quality of vision was better than before surgery in 60% and worse in 17%. Seventy-seven percent did not need spectacles. Ninety-eight percent said they would have the surgery again. CONCLUSIONS: As long as the patients are informed of the limitations of PRK for myopia, the results are acceptable.     

Secondary procedures after presbyopic lens exchange

PURPOSE: To assess the indications, incidence, and outcome of secondary procedures after presbyopic lens exchange (PRELEX). SETTING: Private practice, Siena, Italy. METHODS: This prospective nonrandomized single-surgeon study comprised 52 patients having PRELEX by phacoemulsification and multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. The preoperative mean spherical equivalent (SE) was +2.50 diopters (D) +/- 1.38 (SD) (range 0 to +6.0 D). RESULTS: Monocular PRELEX was performed in 8 patients who canceled the fellow-eye surgery because of halos; in this group, the residual refractive error was corrected by photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in 4 eyes, but this did not alleviate halos and IOL exchange was ultimately needed in 7 eyes. Binocular PRELEX was completed in 44 patients; in this group, 14 eyes (8 patients) had PRK for a residual error. The postoperative mean absolute SE in the 18 PRK-treated eyes was 0.33 D (95% confidence interval [CI] of improvement, 0.57-1.32) and the mean uncorrected visual acuity, 0.8 (95% CI of improvement, 0.32-0.45). The final SE was within +/-0.5 D in 15 eyes (83.0%) and within +/-1.0 D in 18 eyes. Halos after PRK were unchanged in 6 patients, slightly improved in 4, and improved in 2. Photorefractive keratectomy or IOL exchange was needed in eyes with a preoperative SE between plano and +1.75 D (15/40 eyes, 38%) and not needed in eyes with a preoperative SE greater than +1.75 D (0%) (95% CI of difference, 23%-53%). CONCLUSIONS: Presbyopic lens exchange in eyes with emmetropia and low hyperopia was associated with a significantly higher percentage of secondary procedures. Photorefractive keratectomy enhancement can improve distance vision but has a limited effect on halos.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis improves visual acuity in some adult eyes with amblyopia

PURPOSE: To report the results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in a series of adult patients with amblyopia. METHODS: A retrospective noncomparative review was performed on patients with amblyopia who underwent LASIK for correction of ametropia, using the Summit Krumeich Barraquer microkeratome and the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser. Data were collected on uncorrected visual acuity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, anterior segment evaluation, intraocular pressure, corneal topography, and dilated fundus examination (preoperative and postoperatively on day 1, months 2 and 6). RESULTS: Eight eyes of seven patients were included, with a mean patient age of 30 +/- 10 years (range 21 to 49 yr). Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -4.70 D (range -12.62 to +4.71 D) and the best spectacle-corrected visual acuity varied from 20/32 to 20/80. At 2 months after LASIK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -0.37 +/- 0.60 D (range -1.37 to + 0.60 D), uncorrected visual acuity ranged between 20/20 to 20/30, and a mean gain of 3 Snellen lines (range 2 to 4 lines) was observed. All patients reported significant subjective improvement in their perception of vision. The visual acuity and subjective improvement were maintained throughout 6 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: LASIK with the Nidek EC-5000 laser for correction of ametropia in adult amblyopic eyes provided encouraging results for visual acuity improvement beyond correction of the refractive error.     

Results of bilateral photorefractive keratectomy

OBJECTIVE: To study the refraction and potential risks of bilateral photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. DESIGN: Retrospective, noncomparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred eighteen consecutive patients (836 eyes) with myopia from -18 to -0.50 diopters (D) had bilateral simultaneous refractive surgery. INTERVENTION: Refractive surgery was performed with the Nidek EC-5000 slit-scanning excimer laser (Nidek Co., Tokyo, Japan). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Manifest refraction, Snellen best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and uncorrected visual acuity, haze, and halos were evaluated for 12 months after surgery. Both eyes of each patient were examined at the same follow-up after initial treatment. RESULTS: At 12 months after surgery, 95% of eyes were within +/- 1D of emmetropia, and 0.4% of patients had residual anisometropia more than 2 D. Thirty-three eyes (3.9%) were retreated, whereas 5 patients (1.2%) had retreatments in both eyes. Odds ratios between unilateral versus bilateral postoperative events were evaluated for the retreatments (1:0.22; P = 0.001), undercorrections more than 1 D (1:0.17; P < 0.0001), overcorrections more than 1 D (1:0.23; P < 0.0001), loss of 1 line of BSCVA (1:0.44; P < or = 0.002), and loss of 2 lines of BSCVA (1:0.18; P = 0.013). At 12 months after surgery, one eye with a loss of 2 lines of BSCVA was treated for haze more than 1; the fellow eye had haze 0.75. No patient had bilateral haze more than 1. At 12 months after surgery, no patient lost 2 lines of BSCVA in both eyes. There was a higher incidence of halos in both eyes rather than in one eye only (odds ratio: 4.17; P < 0.0001). No postoperative infections occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral events occurred approximately 2.5 to 4 times less often than unilateral events, except for the incidence of halos. The calculated odds ratio did not show an increased risk for the fellow eye while performing bilateral surgery, although not exempted from the risk of infection. It may be difficult to predict a complication in the fellow eye based on the results of the first operated eye.     

Laser in situ keratomileusus for mixed and simple myopic astigmatism with the Nidek EC-5000 Laser

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual and refractive results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for mixed and simple myopic astigmatism using bitoric ablation. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in 65 eyes of 38 consecutive patients to evaluate uncorrected (UCVA) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and cyclopegic and manifest refraction, before and 3 and 6 months after LASIK (Moria LSK-ONE microkeratome, Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser). RESULTS: At 3 and 6 months after LASIK, 40 eyes of 24 patients (64.5%) were available for follow-up examination. Mean age was 25.9 +/- 6.6 years (range 18 to 43 yr). Mean preoperative manifest spherical equivalent refraction was -1.40 +/- 0.80 D (range -3.80 to +0.50 D) mean preoperative cylinder was -3.30 +/- 1.30 D (range -1.00 to -6.00 D). At 6 months follow-up, mean manifest spherical equivalent refraction was +0.30 +/- 0.46 D (range -0.38 to +1.88 D), mean cylinder was -0.73 +/- 0.61 D (range -2.25 to 0 D). There was a 77.8% decrease in astigmatism magnitude. According to vector analysis, mean achieved vector magnitude was 80% of intended. Fifty percent (20 eyes) had a cylinder within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia. Twenty-three eyes (57.5%) had a spherical component within +/- 0.50 D. Eighty-five percent (34 eyes) had postoperative UCVA of 20/40 or better. Ten percent (four eyes) lost two lines of Snellen BSCVA, whereas 35% (14 eyes) gained one or more lines. CONCLUSIONS: Bitoric LASIK with the Moria LSK-ONE microkeratome and Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser was effective and safe for the reduction of cylinder in mixed and simple myopic astigmatism. Moderate undercorrection of the cylinder was evident.     

Photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy in myopes. Nidek US Investigators Group

PURPOSE: Photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK) was studied in a multi-center clinical trial. The Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser was evaluated for its effect on refraction, visual acuity, and safety measures as part of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulated study. METHODS: Eight U.S. centers enrolled adults with eyes having refractive astigmatism up to 4.00 D and a myopic spherical equivalent refraction up to -8.00 D. Results are reported for 749 eyes of 486 patients with at least 6 months follow-up. The rectangular beam scanning Nidek EC-5000 used a 5.5-mm-diameter treatment zone, a 7.0-mm-diameter peripheral blend zone, and a 40 Hz pulse rate for surface treatment of myopic astigmatism. Nomogram corrections to machine settings were required to achieve the desired results. RESULTS: Preoperative average spherical equivalent refraction of -4.90+/-1.74 D was reduced to -0.02+/-0.79 D at 6 months. Refractive stability was established at 3 months. Over 62% of eyes were within +/-0.50 D of desired correction at 6 months, with over 86% within +/-1.00 D. Uncorrected visual acuity improved by an average of 10 Snellen lines; over 64% of eyes saw 20/20 or better uncorrected and over 93% saw 20/40 or better uncorrected at 6 and 12 months. PARK treatment effectively reduced astigmatism with little average axis error or magnitude error. Corneal haze and safety concerns were minimal. CONCLUSIONS: Photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy using the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser provided significant reduction of myopia and astigmatism, with minimal complications.