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.     

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.     

Combined posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens and laser in situ keratomileusis: bioptics for extreme myopia.

PURPOSE: To examine the efficacy, predictability, stability, and safety of combined posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with extreme myopia. METHODS: We analyzed the results of 67 eyes that received a posterior chamber hydrogel-collagen plate phakic IOL (STAAR Collamer Implantable Contact Lens) and also underwent secondary LASIK for the correction of extreme myopia. Mean follow-up was 3 months after the LASIK portion of the procedure (range, 1 day to 6 mo after LASIK). RESULTS: Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -23.00 +/- 3.60 D (range, -18.75 to -35.00 D), and mean refractive cylinder was 1.50 +/- 1.20 D (range, 0 to 5.00 D). Mean spherical equivalent refraction after IOL implantation and before LASIK was -6.00 +/- 2.80 D (range, -2.00 to -14.38 D) and mean refractive cylinder 1.50 +/- 1.10 D (range, 0 to 5.00 D). Mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction at last examination after the LASIK portion of the two-part phakic IOL-LASIK procedure was -0.20 +/- 0.90 D (range, +1.75 to -5.13 D), and mean refractive cylinder was 0.50 +/- 0.50 (range, 0 to 2.25 D). Eighty-five percent (57 eyes) were within +/- 1.00 D and 67% (45 eyes) were within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia at last examination. The refractions remained stable with a statistically insignificant change (P > .05 at each interval) during follow-up. Postoperative uncorrected visual acuity at last examination was 20/20 or better in 3% (2 eyes) and 20/40 or better in 69% (46 eyes). A gain of 2 or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity was seen in 51 eyes (76%) and no eyes lost 2 or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity at last examination. CONCLUSION: Combined posterior chamber phakic IOL implantation with the STAAR Collamer plate lens and LASIK (bioptics) is an effective and reasonably predictable method for correcting myopia from -18 to -35 D. Gains in spectacle-corrected visual acuity were common, and results demonstrated good short-term safety and refractive stability.     

Photorefractive keratectomy after cataract surgery in uncommon cases: long-term results

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the excimer laser correction of the residual refractive errors after cataract extraction with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in uncommon cases. METHODS: Totally 24 patients with high residual refractive error after cataract surgery with IOL implantation were examined. Twenty-two patients had a history of phacoemulsification and IOL implantation, and two had extra-capsular cataract extraction with IOL implantation. Detailed examination of preoperative medical records was done to explain the origin of the post-cataract refractive errors. All patients underwent photorefractire keratectomy (PRK) enhancement. The mean outcome measures were refraction, uncorretted visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal transparency and follow up ranged from 1 to 8y. RESULTS: The principal causes of residual ametropia was inexact IOL calculation in abnormal eyes with high myopia and congenital lens abnormalities, followed by corneal astigmatism both suture induced and preexisting. After cataract surgery and before the laser enhancement the mean spherical equivalent (SE) was -0.56±3 D ranging from -4.62 to +2.25 D in high myopic patients, instead it was -1±1.73 D ranging from -3.25 to +3.75 D in the astigmatic eyes, with a mean cylinder of -3.75±0 ranging from -3 to +5.50 D. After laser refractive surgery the mean SE was 0.1±0.73, ranging from -0.50 to +1.50 in the myopic group, and it was -0.50±0.57 ranging from -1.25 to +0.50 in astigmatic patients, with a mean cylinder of -0.25±0.75. In myopic patients the mean UCVA and BCVA were 0.038±0.072 logMAR and 0.018±0.04 respectively, both ranging from 0.10 to 0.0. In astigmatic patients, the mean UCVA and BCVA were 0.213±0.132 and 0.00±0.0 respectively, UCVA ranging from 0.50 to 0.22 and BCVA was 0.00. All patients presented normal corneal transparency. No ocular hypertension was detected and no corneal haze was observed. All registered values remained stable also at the end line evaluation. CONCLUSION: The excimer laser treatment of residual refractive errors after cataract surgery with IOL implantation in abnormal eyes resulted in satisfactory and stable visual outcome with good safety and efficacy.     

【In Press】Photorefractive keratectomy after cataract surgery in uncommon cases. Long-term results

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the excimer laser correction of the residual refractive errors after cataract extraction with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in uncommon cases. METHODS: 24 patients with high residual refractive error after cataract surgery with IOL implantation were examined. Twenty-two patients had a history of phacoemulsification and IOL implantation, and two had extra-capsular cataract extraction with IOL implantation. Detailed examination of preoperative medical records was done to explain the origin of the post-cataract refractive errors. All patients underwent PRK enhancement. The mean outcome measures were refraction, UCVA, BCVA and corneal transparency and follow up ranged from 1 to 8y. RESULTS: The principal causes of residual ametropia was inexact IOL calculation in abnormal eyes with high myopia and congenital lens abnormalities, followed bycorneal astigmatism both suture induced and preexisting. After cataract surgery and before the laser enhancement the mean SE was -0.56±3 D ranging from -4.62 to +2.25 D in high myopic patients, instead it was -1±1.73 D ranging from -3.25 to +3.75 D in the astigmatic eyes, with a mean cylinder of -3.75±0 ranging from -3 to +5.50. After laser refractive surgery the mean SE was 0.1±0.73, ranging from -0.50 to +1.50 in the myopic group, and it was -0.50 ±0.57 ranging from -1.25 to +0.50 in astigmatic patients, with a mean cylinder of -0.25 ±0.75. In myopic patients the mean UCVA and BCVA were 0.038 Log MAR ±0.072 and 0.018 ±0.04 respectively, both ranging from 0.10 to 0.0. In astigmatic patients, the mean UCVA and BCVA were 0.213±0.132 and 0.00±0.0 respectively: UCVA ranging from 0.50 to 0.22 and BCVA was 0.00. All patients presented normal corneal transparency. No ocular hypertension was detected and no corneal haze was observed. All registered values remained stable also at the end line evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The excimer laser treatment of residual refractive errors after cataract surgery with IOL implantation in abnormal eyes resulted in satisfactory and stable visual outcome with good safety and efficacy.     

Nomogram adjustment of laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and myopic astigmatism with the Alcon LADARVision system

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual and refractive results of conventional (non-wavefront) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism using the Alcon LADARVision 4000 excimer laser system and nomogram adjustment techniques. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 499 eyes that had LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism was performed. Preoperative manifest spherical equivalent refraction ranged from -0.43 to -6.00 D and preoperative astigmatism ranged from 0 to -4.75 D. Patients were evaluated during 3 months following surgery. RESULTS: One month after surgery, 72% of eyes examined (298/415 eyes) had uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better. Three months after surgery, 83% of eyes examined (216/261 eyes) had UCVA of 20/20 or better. One and three months after surgery, 82% and 83% of eyes, respectively, were within +/-0.50 D of attempted correction; 97% of eyes were within +/-1.00 D at both 1 and 3 months. No eye lost more than 1 line of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at 3 months after surgery. At the 3-month examination, 83% of eyes had UCVA better than or equal to preoperative BSCVA. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional LASIK to correct myopia and myopic astigmatism was safe and effective using the Alcon LADARVision 4000 excimer laser system. Outcomes were substantially improved throughout development of an accurate nomogram, derived from continually updated regression analysis of previous refractive results.     

Combined surgery to correct high myopia: iris claw phakic intraocular lens and laser in situ keratomileusis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of combined surgery, implantation of an Artisan phakic iris claw intraocular lens (IOL) followed by laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) to correct high myopia. METHODS: A prospective study of 6 patients (8 eyes) with high myopia who had Artisan phakic IOL implantation followed by LASIK was undertaken. The IOL was a standard -15.00-D, 6-mm diameter optical zone. Residual refractive error was corrected by LASIK. Mean follow-up was 16 +/- 4 months (range, 12 to 20 mo). RESULTS: After the second procedure (LASIK), uncorrected visual acuity ranged from 0.4 to 0.63 (mean, 0.5 +/- 0.07) at 1 month and from 0.6 to 0.7 (mean, 0.62 +/- 0.04) at 12 months. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity improved 2 or more lines in 62.5% (5 eyes) from preoperative values. Mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -0.68 +/- 0.23 at 1 month and -0.35 +/- 0.22 at 12 months after LASIK. All eyes were within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia following the LASIK portion of the two-stage procedure and 5 eyes were within +/-0.50 D. We had no major complications. No significant endothelial damage occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The accurate refractive outcome, absence of major complications, stability of results, and most important, improvement in quality of vision (defined as no change in vision when illumination conditions varied, eg, at night) experienced by these highly myopic patients are reasons to continue using and improving this combined technique.     

Use of Verisyse/Artisan phakic intraocular lens for the reduction of myopia in a patient with pellucid marginal degeneration

PURPOSE: To describe a patient who underwent implantation of a Verisyse/Artisan iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens (IOL) for correction of high myopia in pellucid marginal degeneration (PMD). METHODS: A patient with PMD was observed during a period of 7 years after the implantation of a Verisyse/Artisan phakic IOL. At each visit, slit-lamp evaluation was performed, and corneal topography, endothelial cell count, manifest refraction, and uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity were determined. RESULTS: Verisyse/Artisan phakic IOL implantation was performed for the correction of the patient's high myopia in the presence of early-stage PMD. The preoperative refraction of the right eye was -13.0 -3.0 x 90 degrees. The postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was +0.50 D after 1 year and +0.50 D after 7 years. The preoperative refraction of the left eye was -13.0 -1.25 x 55 degrees. The postoperative SE was -0.38 D after 1 year and -0.13 D after 7 years. Preoperative topographic astigmatism for the right and left eye was 2.94 and 0.81 D, respectively. Seven years later, topographic astigmatism for the right and left eye had changed to 4.45 and 0.71 D, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This case shows that the implantation of a Verisyse/Artisan phakic IOL may be effective in the treatment of refractive error in PMD. This case discusses the value of a removable (as opposed to a permanent) solution, such as the Verisyse/Artisan phakic IOL device, in the treatment of refractive error in PMD.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for correction of high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for correction of high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty, and to assess the refractive results and predictability of the procedure. METHODS: LASIK was performed on 19 patients (19 eyes) with high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty, using the Chiron Automated Corneal Shaper and the Chiron-Technolas Keracor 116 excimer laser. The amount of preoperative refractive astigmatism ranged from 6.50 to 14.50 D (mean, 9.21 +/- 1.95 D) and the spherical component of manifest refraction ranged from -7.00 to +1.25 D (mean, -2.14 +/- 2.11 D). All patients completed a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: Refraction was stable after 3 months. At 1 year after LASIK, the amount of refractive astigmatism was reduced to a mean of 1.09 +/- 0.33 D (range, 0.50 to 1.75 D), with 57.9% of the eyes within +/- 1.00 D of refractive astigmatism. The mean percent reduction of astigmatism was 87.9 +/- 3.7%. The postoperative spherical component of manifest refraction ranged from -1.00 to +1.75 D with a mean of +0.43 +/- 0.82 D. Vector analysis showed that the mean amount of axis deviation was 1.1 +/- 1.3 degrees and the mean percent correction of preoperative astigmatism was 92.6 +/- 8.4%. There were no intraoperative complications. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not reduced in any eye, and improved by 2 or more lines in 42.1% of eyes after LASIK. CONCLUSION: LASIK with the Chiron-Technolas Keracor 116 excimer laser was effective for correction of both astigmatism and myopia after penetrating keratoplasty. The procedure proved to be safe and gave fairly predictable and stable refractive results.     

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.     

Excimer laser refractive correction of myopia after episcleral buckling for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term effects of excimer laser treatment for ametropia after surgical treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) with scleral buckles. SETTING: Helsinki University Eye Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. METHODS: Ten patients (10 eyes) who had 1 or more surgeries for RRD followed by refractive surgery for myopia were retrospectively enrolled in this study and were examined after excimer laser refractive surgery. Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) was performed using a Star S2 excimer laser system (Visx). The best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), refraction, degree of anisometropia, and topographical changes were evaluated before and after the surgeries. RESULTS: All patients were free of asthenopic symptoms after refractive surgery. At the end of the follow-up, a mean of 67 months +/- 14 (SD) after refractive surgery, 6 patients were within +/-1.0 diopter of the intended correction. Compared with previously reported cohorts of myopic patients, the achieved refraction in patients who previously had a scleral buckling procedure was worse. The postoperative refraction was stable, and corneal topography did not show induced scar formation, keratectasia, or irregular astigmatism. After refractive surgery, the BSCVA improved 1 Snellen line in 3 patients and 2 lines in 1 patient. One patient lost 1 Snellen line and another patient lost 2 lines. Four patients showed no changes. New retinal complications were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the long-term, PRK and LASIK were safe methods for the treatment of myopia in RRD patients after scleral buckling. The predictability of myopic LASIK/PRK may be worse than generally reported in myopic cohorts.     

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.     

Bioptics by angle-supported phakic lenses and photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of the combination of angle-supported phakic intraocular lenses (IOLs) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for the correction of myopia and astigmatism. METHODS: Prospective, non-randomized single-surgeon study on 48 patients (76 eyes) undergoing angle-supported phakic IOL implantation with surgical peripheral iridectomy, followed 2 to 3 months later by PRK to correct residual refractive error. Twenty-three patients (33 eyes) achieved good uncorrected visual acuity with IOL implantation alone and did not undergo PRK. Thus, the study was completed by 25 patients (43 eyes) with preoperative mean defocus equivalent (DEQ) of 15.73 D (SD 4.67 D) and mean astigmatism of -2.87 D (SD 1.39 D). RESULTS: Eight months after PRK, mean spherical equivalent was -0.08. Mean DEQ was 0.47 D (SD 0.37); 42/43 eyes (98%) were within +/-1 D of DEQ, and 33/43 eyes (77%) within +/-0.5 D. Mean uncorrected visual acuity was 0.7 (SD 1.9). Safety index was 1.25; efficacy index 1.11. Best-corrected visual acuity improvement (0.16) was statistically significant (95% CI: 1.1 to 2). Halos were moderate in 6/25 patients (24%); severe in 1/25 patients (4%). Endothelial cell density decreased by -6.6%. Pain after PRK was severe in 3/25 patients (12%) and moderate in 13/25 patients (52%). Complications were recurrent iridocyclitis in one eye, transient ocular hypertension in two eyes, and incomplete iridectomy in one eye. CONCLUSIONS: Angle-supported phakic IOLs followed by adjustment by PRK offer good efficacy, predictability, and safety to manage large refractive myopic errors.     

Surgically induced astigmatism after photorefractive keratectomy with the excimer laser

PURPOSE: To evaluate retrospectively the effect of spherical excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) on astigmatism. METHODS: Four hundred seventy consecutive eyes of patients who had PRK for the treatment of myopia without astigmatic keratotomy, PRK reoperation, or other surgical procedures were evaluated in a retrospective clinical study. PRK was performed using the Summit Apex excimer laser with attempted corrections from 1 to 7 diopters (D) of myopia. Preoperative and postoperative astigmatism was determined by manifest refraction refined with a 0.25-D Jackson cross cylinder and evaluated with vector analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-five ( 18%) eyes continued to have a spherical refraction after PRK, 53 (11%) eyes had the same preoperative astigmatism, and 332 (71%) eyes had a change in magnitude of astigmatism > or =0.25 D after spherical PRK. The absolute change in astigmatism magnitude irrespective of axis was +0.4 +/- 0.4 (standard deviation) D at 6 months after PRK. Eyes with change in astigmatism power tended to have higher preoperative myopia and higher preoperative astigmatism. Vector analysis revealed surgically induced astigmatism was 0.68 +/- 0.50 D (range, 0-3.25 D) at 1 month and 0.56 +/- 0.47 D (range, 0-3.1 D) at 12 months after spherical PRK. CONCLUSION: Spherical excimer laser PRK is associated with significant surgically induced astigmatism that is likely related to decentration of the ablation, excimer laser beam irregularities, and variations in wound healing across the ablated zone. Surgically induced astigmatism will complicate attempts to correct astigmatism simultaneously at the time of PRK and suggest that such attempts are likely to be problematic for lower levels of astigmatism.     

Effect of preoperative keratometry on refractive outcomes after laser in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of preoperative keratometry on the refractive outcome after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia. SETTING: University Eye Clinic, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, China. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the records of patients who had LASIK for myopia greater than -6.0 diopters (D) using the Chiron Automated Corneal Shaper and the Schwind Keratome-F excimer laser were reviewed. RESULTS: Laser in situ keratomileusis was performed in 167 eyes of 103 patients (mean age 34.7 years +/- 7.5 [SD]). Preoperative myopic spherical equivalent (SE) refraction was -9.0 +/- 2.0 D (range -6.0 to -13.9 D). Three months after surgery, SE refraction was -0.04 +/- 1.1 D (range +2.3 to -3.3 D); uncorrected visual acuity > or = 20/40 was present in 91.8% of 110 eyes in which emmetropia was the postoperative goal. Mean preoperative keratometry was 43.9 +/- 1.5 D (range 40.3 to 48.1 D). When eyes were stratified by the degree of preoperative myopia in 1.0 D steps, a trend toward greater undercorrection was noted in eyes with preoperative keratometry < 43.5 D than in those with steeper keratometry (> 44.5 D) in all myopia groups except the -7.0 to -7.9 D group. This difference was statistically significant in eyes with a preoperative SE of -10.0 to -10.9 D and -11.0 to -11.9 D. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative keratometry appeared to influence the refractive outcome after myopic LASIK. Eyes with flatter corneas tended to have greater undercorrection than eyes with similar myopia and steeper corneas. Validation of these findings in larger data sets using the methodology described may improve the predictability of current LASIK nomograms, particularly in eyes with high myopia.     

Derzeitiger Stand der refraktiven Chirurgie an Hornhaut und Linse

Refractive surgery includes all procedures which are primarily targeted at changing the refractive power of the eye. Currently laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is indicated to correct myopia of up to ??8 D, hyperopia up to +?3 D and astigmatism up to 5 D. Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) are primarily recommended for myopia up to ??6 D and for greater refractive errors, phakic intraocular lenses (IOL) are the first choice (myopia greater than ??6 D and hyperopia greater than +?3 D). If presbyopia is present in addition to the high refractive error, refractive lens exchange is another alternative.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis using the Nidek EC-5000 or the Alcon LADARVision 4000 systems

PURPOSE: To compare the refractive results of eyes with low to moderate myopia that underwent laser in situ keratomileusis with either the Nidek EC-5000 or the Alcon LADARVision 4000 excimer laser systems. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 114 LASIK procedures with either the Nidek EC-5000 (54 eyes) or the Alcon LADARVision 4000 (60 eyes) excimer laser systems. Preoperative refractive errors were similar and both populations were treated during the same time period. Data analyzed included uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), spherical magnitude, spherical equivalent refraction, astigmatism power, astigmatism axis, and vector astigmatism change. RESULTS: Results at 6 months were analyzed. Spherical correction change was a mean -3.95 D for Nidek treated eyes and a mean -4.53 D for LADARVision treated eyes (P = .20). Mean spherical equivalent refraction change was -3.70 D for Nidek eyes and -4.20 D for LADARVision eyes (P = .23). Mean change in UCVA (LogMAR) was 1.05 for Nidek eyes and 0.99 for LADARVision eyes (P = .40). Mean astigmatism magnitude change was 0.71 D for Nidek eyes and 0.77 D for LADARVision eyes (P = .63). Mean vector-corrected astigmatism change was 0.93 D for Nidek eyes and 1.00 D for LADARVision eyes (P = .63). Mean vector-corrected astigmatism axis for Nidek eyes was 3.08 D and for LADARVision eyes 6.58 D (P = .70). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in refractive results in eyes treated with the Alcon LADARVision 4000 or the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser systems. Inherent differences between the two laser systems are highlighted.     

Intraocular lens power calculation after laser in situ keratomileusis: Aphakic refraction technique

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of a new method of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for eyes having cataract extraction after previous laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTING: Clinical private practice and ambulatory surgical center, Astoria, New York, USA. METHODS: This retrospective study was of 12 eyes of 9 patients who presented for cataract extraction after previous LASIK. Cataract removal was performed under topical anesthesia without IOL implantation. Approximately 30 minutes later, a manifest aphakic refraction was performed. The calculation of the IOL power was obtained by using an algorithm derived from previous experience with secondary IOL implantation (Mackool algorithm). The patient then returned to the operating room for lens implantation (aphakic refraction technique). RESULTS: The refractive error 2 weeks postoperatively, defined as the difference between the intended and actual refractive outcome, ranged from 0.50 diopter (D) of unintended hyperopia to 0.75 (D) of unintended myopia. CONCLUSIONS: The aphakic refraction technique provided an extremely accurate postoperative refraction in eyes having cataract with IOL implantation surgery after previous LASIK. Although the pool sample was small (12 eyes) and the range of the aphakic refraction was limited (+8.50 to 12.375 D), the technique was found to be remarkably accurate.     

Prospective study of photorefractive keratectomy for myopia using the VISX StarS2 excimer laser system

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and predictability of excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for compound myopic astigmatism using the VISX StarS2 excimer laser system with international version 3.1 software. METHODS: We report a prospective consecutive study of myopic excimer laser PRK, performed in a multi-surgeon environment with 200 eyes of 117 patients, to correct naturally occurring compound myopic astigmatism of between -0.50 to -5.90 D manifest refractive sphere and up to -3.50 D manifest refractive astigmatism. Patients were assessed prior to surgery and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight of 200 treatments (99%) were reviewed 1 year after surgery; 193 of 198 eyes (97%) achieved 20/40 or better uncorrected visual acuity and 163 of 198 eyes (82%) achieved 20/20 or better. One eye lost two lines of Snellen visual acuity assessed at 12 months but recovered acuity when assessed at 18 months. Mean spherical equivalent corneal plane power was reduced from -3.50 to +0.90 D 1 month after treatment and 0 D at 12 months (SD 0.67 D). Three eyes of three patients underwent further treatment, two with LASIK and one with PRK for residual refractive error. Refractive astigmatism of >1.00 D was reduced from a mean -1.70 to -0.70 D at 1 year after treatment. Vector magnitude was 79% of that intended and mean vector axis error (absolute) was 8.5 degrees. No eye had a severe haze response. Pelli-Robson contrast acuity was significantly reduced after treatment from a mean 1.72 D preoperatively to 1.63 D at 12 months (P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: PRK for myopia using the VISX StarS2 excimer laser system was effective in the treatment of low myopic astigmatism, although there was a significant reduction in Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity.     

Artisan iris-claw phakic intraocular lens followed by laser in situ keratomileusis for high hyperopia

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety, efficacy, predictability, stability, complications, and patient satisfaction after Artisan phakic intraocular lens (IOL) implantation followed by laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the correction of high hyperopia. SETTING: Instituto Oftalmólogico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. METHODS: This prospective trial included 39 eyes with a mean preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) of 7.39 diopters (D) +/- 1.30 (SD) and a cylinder between 0 and -4.25 D. The Artisan iris-fixated phakic IOL (Ophtec) for hyperopia was implanted, and LASIK was performed 6 to 8 months later. The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), refraction, endothelial cell loss (ECL), endothelium morphologic analysis, and patient satisfaction were recorded. The minimum follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: At 1 year, 37 eyes (94.9%) were within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia and 31 eyes (79.5%) were within +/-0.50 D. Thirty-five eyes (89.7%) achieved a UCVA of 0.5 or better. There was a statistically significant decrease in BCVA after phakic IOL implantation, but this effect was corrected after LASIK. Nine eyes (23.1%) lost 1 line of BCVA; 7 eyes (17.9%) gained at least 1 line. One eye (2.6%) showed a change in SE greater than 1.0 D over the follow-up period. The mean ECL was 10.9%, but morphologic analysis suggested no additional damage caused by LASIK over that produced by phakic IOL surgery. Overall patient satisfaction was high. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of Artisan phakic IOL implantation and LASIK safely, predictably, and effectively reduced high hyperopia. A loss of 1 line of BCVA should be expected in about one third of eyes implanted with this IOL. Halos and glare at night remain a potential problem.