Laser in situ keratomileusis enhancement after radial keratotomy

PURPOSE: To present results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) enhancement after radial keratotomy (RK). METHODS: Sixteen eyes of 10 patients were treated with LASIK for residual myopia and hyperopia after RK. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -3.14+/-3.04 D (range, -6.675 to +6.00 D). Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was 20/20 in 9 eyes, 20/25 in 6 eyes, and 20/30 in 1 eye. Uncorrected visual acuity was better than 20/40 in only 2 eyes. Patients were followed at 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3, and 6 months, and 1 year. Mean follow-up was 8.3 months (range, 1 to 17 mo). RESULTS: All eyes received one LASIK enhancement. Mean final spherical equivalent refraction was +0.16+/-0.68 D (range, -1.00 to +1.75 D). No eyes experienced any visual loss. Five eyes gained 1 line of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 in 9 eyes, 20/25 in 6 eyes, and 20/30 in 1 eye. Two eyes of one patient had the previous RK incisions open. CONCLUSION: LASIK was an effective treatment for correction of residual myopia and hyperopia after RK.     

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.     

Comparative results evaluation of residual myopia and astigmatism correction after radial keratotomy by photorefraction keratectomy and laser specialized keratomileusis]

The results of correction of residual myopia by photorefraction keratectomy (PRK) (51 eyes) and laser specialized keratomileusis (LASIK) (36 eyes) after radial keratotomy (RK) are compared. The patients were observed for up to 12 months. After PRK, 7.3% patients developed late fleur of the cornea, evaluated by at least 2 points. The incidence of fleur directly depended on the value of residual myopia. After LASIK none of the patients developed such fleur. The best visual acuity (0.5 and higher without correction) was attained in 70.73% after PRK and RK, vs. 100% after LASIK. The results of photorefraction operations and severity of residual myopia after RK correlated. In residual myopia of up to -3 diopters the results of correction by PRK and LASIK were virtually the same. In residual myopia higher than -3 diopters, LASIK is preferable.     

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.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis enhancement after photorefractive keratectomy

OBJECTIVE: To describe the safety, effectiveness, and predictability of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for correcting residual myopia after primary photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). DESIGN: A retrospective, noncomparative case series. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Thirty-six consecutive eyes of 30 patients underwent LASIK after primary PRK. A Multiscan Schwind excimer laser was used for LASIK enhancement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, refraction, videokeratography, and complications were determined before and after LASIK retreatment. Follow-up was at least 12 months. RESULTS: Before LASIK, 11.11% of eyes showed a UCVA of 20/40 or better. This increased to 94.44% 12 months after LASIK. A UCVA of 20/25 or better was achieved in 0% before and in 72.22% after retreatment. Refraction +/-0.5 diopters (spherical equivalent) represented 0% of eyes before and 77.78% of eyes after enhancement. Before LASIK, two eyes had significant haze. Haze remained in these two eyes and appeared in another eye. CONCLUSIONS: Laser in situ keratomileusis proved to be safe and effective for treating residual myopia after PRK. Care must be taken when considering LASIK retreatment in patients with significant haze after primary PRK.     

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.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for residual refractive error after phakic intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE: To determine the visual and refractive outcome of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with prior posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens implantation for high myopia. METHODS: We studied a series of 37 consecutive eyes of 31 patients who underwent LASIK or PRK for residual refractive error following collamer posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) (Staar Surgical Implantable Contact Lens) implantation into a phakic eye. Twenty-eight eyes had LASIK and nine eyes had PRK. Mean follow-up was 8.1 +/- 4.7 months after laser ablation (range, 3 to 18 mo). RESULTS: The preoperative mean spherical equivalent refraction prior to phakic posterior chamber IOL implantation was -17.74 +/- 4.89 D (range, -9.75 to -28.00 D). Following phakic IOL implantation and prior to LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -2.56 +/- 2.34 D (range, -0.25 to -8.75 D). One month following LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -0.24 +/- 0.52 D (range, -1.50 to +1.50 D), 3 months following LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -0.19 +/- 0.50 D (range, -1.50 to +1.00 D). The refraction was within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia in 36 eyes (97.2%) and within +/-0.50 D in 31 eyes (83.7%). Three eyes developed anterior subcapsular opacities several weeks after laser ablation, one eye developed macular hemorrhage 4 weeks after laser ablation, and one eye had corticosteroid induced ocular hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: LASIK or PRK can be used to treat the residual refractive error following posterior chamber phakic IOL implantation.     

准分子激光角膜原位磨镶术矫治高度近视准分子激光屈光性角膜切削术后屈光回退的临床观察

目的评价准分子激光角膜原位磨镶术（LASIK）矫治高度近视准分子激光屈光性角膜切削术（PRK）后屈光回退的疗效。方法回顾性临床研究。对PRK术后2年以上、屈光回退且屈光度稳定的患者8例14眼行LASIK,对LASIK术后术眼进行评价。患眼PRK术前屈光度为-6.25～-12.50 D,PRK术后屈光度为-1.50～-6.25 D。随访观察LASIK矫正1年后术眼的裸眼视力、最佳矫正视力、屈光度、上皮下雾状混浊（haze）形成和角膜厚度的变化。结果所有患眼术后主观症状较轻。LASIK术后1年平均球镜度数为（-0.62±0.94）D。LASIK术后0.5≤裸眼视力〈0.8者4眼,≥0.8者9眼,1眼（7.1%）最佳矫正视力下降2行。4眼术后出现不同程度的haze,包括2级haze 3眼、3级haze 1眼。应用氟米龙滴眼液1个月后,haze及屈光回退减轻;术后1年,1级haze 2眼,2级haze 2眼,3级haze 1眼。LASIK术前角膜厚度为（467±38）μm,术后为（422±21）μm。结论高度近视PRK术后屈光回退行LASIK矫治是一种可行的方法,但少数患者术后可出现haze,仍需治疗。     

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.     

Comparison of two procedures: photorefractive keratectomy versus laser in situ keratomileusis for low to moderate myopia

PURPOSE: A prospective study was conducted to compare the effectiveness, safety, and stability of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for correction of low to moderate myopia. METHODS: Forty-five patients with a manifest refraction (PRK, -4.54 +/- 0.80; LASIK, -4.82 +/- 1.10) from -1.50 to -6.00 diopters (D) were treated and followed-up for 6 months. In each case, 1 eye received PRK and the other LASIK. The first eye treated, and the surgical method used in the first eye, were randomized. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, corneal haze, and topographic analysis of ablation decentration were examined. RESULTS: The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 35 PRK eyes (77.8%) and 28 LASIK eyes (62.2%) at 6 months (P =.107). At 6 months, 28 eyes (62.2%) that received PRK showed a spherical equivalent of within +/-0.5 D as compared with 24 eyes (53.4%) that received LASIK (P =.393). The amount of ablation decentration was 0.37 +/- 0.25 mm in PRK eyes and 0.49 +/- 0.38 mm in LASIK eyes at 3 months (P =.36). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, PRK and LASIK were found to be similarly effective and predictive of correction in low to moderate myopia. PRK has the advantage of less ablation decentration and is safer than LASIK, so we recommend PRK for eyes with low to moderate myopia.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis to correct residual myopia and astigmatism after radial keratotomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in selected post-radial-keratotomy (RK) eyes with residual myopia and astigmatism. SETTING: TLC-The Brea Laser Eye Center, Brea, California, USA. METHODS: Nine eyes of 6 patients who had had RK but had residual myopia and/or astigmatism had LASIK. All RK eyes had 8 radial incisions, were more than 1 year post-RK, had no epithelial inclusion cysts or corneal disease, and had had no subsequent ocular surgery. Follow-up was a minimum of 13 months, at which time uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), manifest refraction, cycloplegic refraction, keratometry, central and peripheral pachymetries, intraocular pressure, and a subjective assessment of visual function were obtained. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, the mean spherical equivalent (SE) was -0.156 diopter (D) +/- 0.174 (SD). All eyes treated for distance vision had a UCVA of 20/25 or better. No patient lost BCVA. No intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. Seven eyes had morning and evening measurements. The mean change in manifest SE from morning to evening was -0.143 D. Six of the 7 eyes (86%) had 0 to 1 Snellen line change in UCVA from morning to evening. The subjective questionnaire revealed a high degree of satisfaction with overall vision, minimal glare, and less fluctuation in daily vision than before LASIK. CONCLUSION: Laser in situ keratomileusis is safe and efficacious for reducing residual myopia and astigmatism in properly selected RK patients.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for residual myopia after primary LASIK

PURPOSE: To analyze the results of secondary laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for residual myopia after primary LASIK. SETTING: Dr. Agarwal's Eye Hospital, Chennai, India. METHODS: A retrospective study of 50 eyes of 29 patients who had a secondary LASIK procedure was carried out. After a mean follow-up of 5.84 months +/- 3.24 (SD) after the primary procedure, the mean myopic residual refraction was -4.30 +/- 1.83 diopters (D). In 10 eyes, the primary corneal flap was lifted by blunt dissection. In 40 eyes, the flap was made with a second cut. The secondary LASIK was performed using the Chiron Technolas Keracor 217 excimer laser and the Automated Corneal Shaper microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb). RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 16.58 +/- 3.06 months. At 12 months, the mean spherical equivalent was -0.45 +/- 0.68 D (P <.05). Thirty-one eyes were emmetropic, 13 eyes were within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia, and 5 eyes were within +/-2.00 D. The mean uncorrected visual acuity improved from 20/80 (range 20/60 to 20/200) to 20/40 (range 20/20 to 20/200) (P <.005). Seventeen eyes gained 1 line of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity; 1 eye lost 1 line because of a decentered ablation with an induced postoperative astigmatism of -3.50 D cylinder. No sight-threatening complications such as a free cap, flap irregularity, corneal ectasia, or retinal complication occurred postoperatively. Epithelial ingrowth developed in 5 eyes and corneal thinning, in 1 eye. Three eyes had night glare. CONCLUSION: Secondary LASIK was a safe, stable, and effective method for the treatment of residual myopia after primary LASIK.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis retreatment for residual myopia and astigmatism

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual and refractive results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) retreatment on eyes with residual myopia with or without astigmatism. METHODS: LASIK retreatment was performed on 35 eyes of 23 patients for correction of residual myopia, with or without astigmatism, with a mean manifest spherical equivalent refraction of -2.17+/-0.82 D (range, -1.00 to -3.87 D) and mean refractive astigmatism of -0.55+/-0.61 D (range, 0 to -1.75 D). Retreatment was performed 3 to 18 months after primary LASIK (mean, 5.1+/-2.6 mo). The corneal flap of the previous LASIK was lifted and laser ablation was performed using the Chiron-Technolas Keracor 116 excimer laser. Follow-up was 12 months for all eyes. RESULTS: At 1 year after retreatment, manifest spherical equivalent refraction was reduced to a mean -0.23+/-0.28 D (range, 0 to -0.87 D), and refractive astigmatism was reduced to a mean -0.16+/-0.25 D (range, 0 to -0.75 D). Thirty-two eyes (91.5%) had a manifest spherical equivalent refraction within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia, and 33 eyes (94.3%) had 0 to 0.50 D of refractive astigmatism. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 11 eyes (31.4%). Spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not reduced in any eye after retreatment. There were no significant complications. CONCLUSION: LASIK retreatment was effective for correction of residual myopia or astigmatism after primary LASIK. Refractive results were predictable with good stability after 3 months. Lifting the flap during LASIK retreatment was relatively easy to perform and did not result in visual morbidity in eyes treated from 3 up to 18 months after primary LASIK.     

200 Hz flying-spot technology of the LaserSight LSX excimer laser in the treatment of myopic astigmatism: six and 12 month outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability in the treatment of myopic astigmatism with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) using the 200 Hz flying-spot technology of the LaserSight LSX excimer laser. SETTING: SynsLaser Clinic, Troms?, Norway. METHODS: This retrospective study included 110 eyes treated with LASIK and 87 eyes treated with PRK that were available for evaluation at 6 and 12 months, respectively. The mean preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was -5.35 diopters (D) +/- 2.50 (SD) (range -1.13 to -11.88 D) in the LASIK eyes and -4.72 +/- 2.82 D (range -1.00 to -15.50 D) in the PRK eyes. The treated cylinder was 4.00 D in both groups. Eleven (8.5%) LASIK eyes and 8 (7.4%) PRK eyes had secondary surgical procedures before 6 and 12 months, respectively, and were excluded when the 6 and 12 month outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: None of the eyes lost 2 or more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. Seventy-seven percent of the LASIK eyes and 78% of the PRK eyes achieved an uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better; 98% in both groups achieved 20/40 or better. The SE was within +/-0.5 D of the desired refraction in 83% of the LASIK eyes and 77% of the PRK eyes; it was within +/-1.0 D in 97% and 98%, respectively. The cylinder correction had a mean magnitude of error of 0.04 +/- 0.31 D (range -0.96 to +0.85 D) in the LASIK eyes and 0.02 +/- 0.37 D (range -1.44 to +0.72 D) in the PRK eyes. Refractive stability was achieved at 1 month and beyond in the LASIK eyes and at 3 months and beyond in the PRK eyes. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this study are comparable to those achieved with lasers that use small-beam technology with a lower frequency, as well as with other types of delivery systems. They suggest that the 200 Hz technology used in the LaserSight LSX excimer laser is safe, effective, and predictable and that with LASIK and PRK the results are stable when treating low to moderate myopia and astigmatism up to 4.0 D.     

Femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis after radial keratotomy

PURPOSE: To assess the safety, efficacy, and predictability of femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with previous radial keratotomy (RK). SETTING: Hospital Virgen del Consuelo de Valencia, Valencia, and Vissum Instituto Oftalmológico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. METHODS: This prospective study comprised 11 eyes of 7 patients with residual low myopia after previous RK who had surgery with the IntraLase femtosecond laser (IntraLase Corp.) and the Star 2 excimer laser (Visx, Inc.). Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), defocus equivalent, refraction, flap thickness, flap diameter, and intraoperative complications were evaluated over a minimum 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Although the RK incisions opened in all eyes when the flap was lifted, LASIK was successfully completed in all cases. Mean flap thickness was 119 microm +/- 13 (SD). There were no cases of slipped flaps, microstriae, or epithelial ingrowth. Defocus equivalent was reduced from a mean of 2.51 +/- 0.62 diopters (D) to 0.52 +/- 0.28 D; 7 eyes (63.6%) were within +/-0.50 D, and 11 eyes (100%) were within +/-1.00 D. All eyes had 20/40 or better UCVA, although 2 eyes (18.1%) lost 1 line of BSCVA. CONCLUSIONS: The femtosecond laser was safely used to create thin LASIK flaps in eyes with previous RK. An increased postoperative inflammatory response may explain the loss of BSCVA in some cases. Efficacy and predictability of the procedure were comparable to those of LASIK after RK with mechanical microkeratomes.     

Photorefractive keratectomy versus laser in situ keratomileusis: a control-matched study

OBJECTIVE: Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) outcomes were compared at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seven LASIK-treated eyes (58 patients) and 107 PRK-treated eyes (91 patients) having myopia between -1 and -9.50 diopters (D). All LASIK-treated eyes were analyzed retrospectively and matched with PRK-treated eyes having sphere within +/-0.25 D, +/-1 D of cylinder, and +/-7 years of age. 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, halos, and keratometry were evaluated before surgery and up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Seventy percent of eyes were evaluated at the 12-month postoperative exam. Of these eyes, 83% of LASIK cases and 86% of PRK cases had uncorrected visual acuities of 20/20 or better. Refractions within +/-0.5 D represented 78% of the LASIK eyes and 83% of the PRK eyes at that follow-up. Patients who underwent LASIK reported halos twice as often as patients who underwent PRK using a subjective scale. The odds ratio of high halos for LASIK versus PRK was 3.50 (95% confidence interval, 1.89-6.46; P<0.0001). At 1 month after surgery, 64% of the LASIK eyes were within +/-0.50 D compared with 77% of the PRK eyes. No eye lost 2 Snellen lines of best corrected visual acuity at 6 or 12 months after surgery. Ten PRK eyes (9.3%) and three LASIK eyes (2.8%) were retreated. CONCLUSIONS: PRK and LASIK achieved equal refractive outcomes at all postoperative follow-ups, but LASIK patients were twice as likely to experience halos.     

Changes in central corneal thickness after laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate changes in corneal thickness after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in eyes with the same preoperative refraction, correlate these changes to postoperative refractive outcomes, and compare corneal healing process in a standardized subset of patients. METHODS: Central corneal thickness was measured by contact ultrasound pachymetry in 14 eyes of 8 patients with preoperative myopia of -6.00 D who had LASIK, and in 14 eyes of 8 patients with the same preoperative refractive error who had PRK. Measurements were taken preoperatively, and 1 week, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Data were evaluated and compared using the paired Student t-test and Pearson correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Mean preoperative central corneal thickness in the LASIK group was 549.14 +/- 37.4 microm, and in the PRK group, 552.64 +/- 34.9 microm. At 1-week postoperatively, mean central corneal thickness in the LASIK eyes was 467.28 +/- 29 microm and in the PRK eyes, 473.85 +/- 39.2 microm; at 6 months, central corneal thickness had increased in both groups compared to the 1-week values; LASIK eyes had a mean central corneal thickness of 481.42 +/- 23.0 microm and PRK, 481.50 +/- 35.3 microm. Mean postoperative refraction after 6 months was -0.48 +/- 0.30 D in the LASIK group and -0.67 +/- 0.35 D in the PRK group. CONCLUSION: Increase in central corneal thickness between 1 week and 6 months postoperatively occurred in both LASIK and PRK eyes, but differences were not statistically significant. No statistically significant differences were found in myopic regression between the two patient groups.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for undercorrection and overcorrection after radial keratotomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in the management of overcorrection and undercorrection after radial keratotomy (RK). SETTING: Instituto Oftalmológico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. METHODS: This prospective study comprised 20 eyes of 13 patients. The eyes were divided into 2 groups: 11 eyes that were overcorrected after RK and 9 eyes that were undercorrected after RK. Both groups were treated with LASIK after a mean interval of 22 months +/- 8.4 (SD) (range 12 to 45 months). The follow-up was 6 months. RESULTS: Six months after LASIK, there was a significant decrease in the spherical equivalent in both groups. Ninety-one percent of eyes in the overcorrected group and 89% in the undercorrected group were within +/-1.0 diopter of the intended correction. There was a significant improvement in the uncorrected visual acuity in both groups. In the overcorrected group, 91% showed no change or improvement in their best corrected visual acuity; in the undercorrected group, 89% showed no change or improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Laser in situ keratomileusis was relatively safe in treating both overcorrection and undercorrection after RK. With proper intraoperative precautions, LASIK can effectively treat the residual refractive defects after RK.     

Immediate transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy for treatment of laser in situ keratomileusis flap complications

PURPOSE: To study the role of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in the management of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) flap complications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of seven patients (14 eyes) who had bilateral, simultaneous LASIK (single surgeon [TGA], Summit Apex Plus laser, Hansatome microkeratome in six patients [12 eyes], Automated Corneal Shaper keratome in one patient [two eyes]). One eye of each patient received PRK for a flap complication. The seven patients (four women, three men) had a mean age of 39.2 years (range, 22 to 64 yr). The uncomplicated LASIK eyes had moderate to high myopia (-2.25 to -8.75 D) and the eyes with LASIK flap complications had mild to moderate myopia (-1.50 to -5.75 D). Immediate transepithelial PRK was performed in all eyes after repositioning the defective flap. RESULTS: All seven patients had excellent visual outcome at 6 months follow-up; one patient required an enhancement (astigmatic keratotomy). Six of the seven LASIK eyes had best spectacle-corrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better and one LASIK eye had 20/25. In the transepithelial PRK eyes, six of the seven eyes had best spectacle-corrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better and one eye had 20/30. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate transepithelial PRK treatment of irregular and incomplete LASIK flaps at the time of surgery is an excellent therapeutic option to delayed surgical treatment.     

A comparative study for mesopic contrast sensitivity between photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect on visual performance of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with mesopic contrast sensitivity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postoperative visual performance for 40 eyes undergoing PRK and 40 eyes undergoing LASIK was compared with mesopic contrast sensitivity at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Eyes were divided into two groups (< -6.0 D and > -6.25 D). Mesopic contrast sensitivity was performed with the patient's best-corrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better under photopic conditions. RESULTS: A significant decrease in mesopic contrast sensitivity from preoperative baseline was obtained at all spatial frequencies for the PRK and LASIK groups (P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference at 1 or 3 months postoperatively in both groups (P > .05). At 6 months postoperatively, LASIK significantly decreased mesopic contrast sensitivity more than PRK in myopia with a refractive error of less than -6.0 D, especially at the middle and high spatial frequencies of 6, 9, and 12 cycles per degree (P < .05). However, no statistically significant differences in mesopic contrast sensitivity between PRK and LASIK were found in myopia with a refractive error of greater than -6.25 D (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: In broad-beam excimer laser refractive surgery, PRK seemed to have a more significant effect on mesopic contrast sensitivity than LASIK for myopia with a refractive error of less than -6.0 D at 6 months postoperatively.