Comparison of photorefractive keratectomy, astigmatic PRK, laser in situ keratomileusis, and astigmatic LASIK in the treatment of myopia

PURPOSE: To determine factors affecting refractive and visual outcomes in patients treated with astigmatic and spherical photorefractive keratectomy (A-PRK and PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (A-LASIK and LASIK). SETTING: University referral refractive surgery clinic. METHODS: Refractive and visual acuity results in 619 eyes of 388 consecutive patients having refractive surgery over a 2-year period by a single surgeon were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into mild-to-moderate myopia (spherical equivalent [SE] less than -6.12 diopters [D]) and high myopia (SE -6.12 D or higher). Multivariate and logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Refractive results in flap-based and PRK-based procedures were comparable in mild-to-moderate myopia patients but were significantly better in high-myopia patients having flap-based procedures. Refractive stability was greater in flap-based procedures than in PRK-based procedures. Elliptical ablations yielded a marked reduction in the astigmatic cylinder in patients having A-LASIK and A-PRK, while spherical PRK induced small amounts of with-the-rule astigmatism. Complications were uncommon in both groups, consisting primarily of epithelial ingrowth in flap-based procedures and haze in PRK-based procedures. Multivariate regression identified the preoperative SE as a significant determinant of PRK outcomes (with higher success for lower myopia) and intraocular pressure as a minor determinant of outcomes in PRK-based and flap-based procedures. Logistic regression suggested that only the preoperative SE was a significant factor in predicting the likelihood of poor outcomes in PRK patients. CONCLUSIONS: Refractive outcomes were almost identical in patients having elliptical or spherical ablations with flap-based or PRK-based procedures. In eyes with mild-to-moderate myopia, there was little difference in refractive or visual outcomes between flap-based and PRK-based procedures; in eyes with high myopia, flap-based procedures offered more predictable refractive outcomes and better visual outcomes.     

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.     

Corneal astigmatic change after photorefractive keratectomy and photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy, safety, predictability, and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 70 eyes were treated for myopia and 70 eyes were treated for myopic astigmatism. Refraction, corneal topography, slitlamp findings, and visual acuity in the 2 groups at 1, 3, and 6 months were evaluated and compared. Vector analysis was performed to determine the SIA in both groups. RESULTS: The mean preoperative spherical equivalent at the glasses plane in the PRK and PARK groups was -6.06 diopters (D) and -7.18 D, respectively. At 6 months, the mean reduction in astigmatism in the PARK group was 61.0%. Predictability was within +/-1.0 D in 85.2% of eyes in the PRK group and 62.5% in the PARK group. An uncorrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better was achieved in 91.8% and 83.9% of eyes, respectively. The mean SIA was 0.64 D in the PRK group, with a general with-the-rule axis shift. The results of vector analysis were more favorable when calculated from refractive values than from Sim-K corneal topography values. The mean astigmatism correction index and index of success calculated from refractive data were 0.75 and 0.38 in the PARK group. The mean magnitude and angle of error were 0.22 +/- 0.52 D and -2.13 +/- 24.41 degrees, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Photorefractive keratectomy and PARK were effective and safe procedures for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. However, SIA occurred with spherical myopic treatments. This small SIA may be a confounding factor in low astigmatic treatments.     

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.     

Comparison of photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis for the treatment of compound hyperopic astigmatism

PURPOSE: To compare photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for compound hyperopic astigmatism. SETTING: University laser center. METHODS: This prospective nonrandomized study evaluated 41 consecutive eyes (27 patients) that had PRK and 24 consecutive eyes (15 patients) that had LASIK to correct compound hyperopic astigmatism. RESULTS: The mean preoperative error was +3.06 diopters of sphere (DS) +/-1.73 (SD)/+1.31 +/- 0.60 diopters of cylinder (DC) in the PRK eyes and +2.86 +/-1.28 DS/+1.55 +/- 0.96 DC in the LASIK eyes. The mean maximal pain score in PRK eyes was 1.95 +/- 1.19 (range 0.0 to 3.0) in PRK eyes and 0.84 +/-1.12 in LASIK eyes (P=.0014). The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 7.7% of the PRK eyes and 58.3% of the LASIK eyes at 1 month (P<.001) and 57.9% and 66.7%, respectively, at 9 months (P=.586). The mean postoperative spherical error was -0.95 +/- 0.92 D in PRK eyes and +0.33 +/- 0.56 D in LASIK eyes at 1 month (P<.001) and +0.64 +/- 1.01 D and +0.44 +/- 0.57 D, respectively, at 9 months (P=.375). There was no statistically significant between-group difference in the mean residual astigmatic error. Mild peripheral haze (grade 0.5 to 1.0) occurred in 19.5% of PRK eyes and no LASIK eye. No eye in either group lost more than 2 lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS: Photorefractive keratectomy was more painful than LASIK and led to a slower visual recovery, a higher incidence of peripheral haze, and an initial myopic overcorrection, which self-corrected by 3 to 6 months. Efficacy and stability of the astigmatic correction were similar in both groups. Long-term stability of both procedures requires further study.     

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.     

Surgically induced astigmatism after photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis. Summit PRK-LASIK Study Group

PURPOSE: To compare the axis and magnitude of surgically induced astigmatism in photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial. METHODS: In this prospective randomized trial, 220 eyes of 220 patients entered the study cohort: 105 randomized to PRK and 115 to LASIK. All patients received a single-pass, multizone excimer laser ablation as part of a PRK or LASIK procedure. Attempted corrections ranged from -6.00 to -15.00 diopters (D). The LASIK procedures were performed with nasal hinges. Absolute changes in astigmatism and axis and magnitude of surgically induced astigmatism were analyzed. Patients were followed for up to 6 month. RESULTS: In the PRK group, the mean change in absolute astigmatism was +0.14, +0.16 and +0.32 D at 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively; in the LASIK group, the mean change was -0.15, -0.08, and -0.03 D, respectively. At all time points, a greater proportion of PRK than LASIK eyes had an increase in absolute magnitude of astigmatism. In the PRK group, the axis of vectoral-induced astigmatism was significantly different from random at 3 and 6 months (P = .01, P < .001), respectively) with a tendency for induced with-the-rule shifts postoperatively. In the LASIK group, the axis of vectoral-induced astigmatism was significantly different from random at only 1 month (P = .04), and there was no preponderant direction of axis shift. Despite these findings, other analyses showed no statistically significant between-group differences in vectoral axis or magnitude of surgically induced astigmatism. CONCLUSIONS: Induced astigmatism was generally less and more random in axis in LASIK than in PRK; a general trend for induced with-the-rule astigmatism in PRK was not seen in LASIK. Hypothetically, the lamellar corneal flap in LASIK may counteract the tendency toward steepening at 90 degrees seen in PRK by retracting toward the hinge, by masking underlying induced astigmatism in the ablation zone, or by its mitigating influence on postoperative corneal healing.     

准分子激光屈光性角膜切削术矫正散光的准确性及预测性

目的 探讨准分子激光屈光性角膜切削术（ｅｘｃｉｍｅｒ ｌａｓｅｒ ｐｈｏｔｏｒｅｆｒａｃｔｉｖｅ ｋｅｒｅｃｔｏｍｙ,ＰＲＫ）矫正散光的准确性及预测性。方法 根据角膜地形图提供的角膜屈光力数值,用Ｈｏｌｌａｄａｙ法计算复性近视散光３０例（５３只眼）和单纯近视２３例（３３只眼）患者术前与术后６个月角膜屈光力的差值,确定实际矫正散光度及轴位,及预期矫正散光度及轴位进行对比分析。结果 复性近视散光组５３     

准分子激光角膜切削术后散光的角膜地形图分析

了解准分子激光角膜切削术（ｐｈｏｔｏｇｒａｃｔｉｖｅｋｅｒａｔｅｃｔｏｍｙ，ＰＲＫ）前、后最大轴性散光的变化及对术后视力的影响。方法对ＰＲＫ后１年以上的６１例（１０９只眼）术前散瞳验光散光度一１．００～－２．００Ｄ的角膜地形图进行分析及视力检查。结果散瞳验光散光轴位与地形图记录散光轴位基本一致，而散光度数有一定差异。地形图检查显示，最大散光轴位以循规性极光最多，计６７只眼（６１％），斜轴性散光３６只眼（３３％），逆规性散光６只眼（６％）。手术前、后散光轴位变化极小。散光度多数在术后１０天及１个月开始增加，以后逐渐减少。６个月或１年趋于稳定。术后的残存散光对视力影响较小，实际矫正度在预期矫正度±１．００Ｄ以内者占９７％。结论采用球柱折算方法，进行ＰＲＫ，对矫正近视合并散光者（－２．００Ｄ以下），可以获得满意的屈光矫正。     

Surgically induced astigmatism after hyperopic and myopic photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To compare the axis and magnitude of surgically induced refractive astigmatism (SIA) after hyperopic and myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study, the VISX Star S2 excimer laser was used to create a peripheral annular ablation profile to correct spherical hyperopia in 23 eyes of 16 consecutive patients. Attempted corrections ranged from +0.50 diopter (D) to +4.25 D with 0 to 1.00 D of astigmatism. The same laser was used to create a central ablation profile to correct spherical myopia in 25 eyes of 17 consecutive patients. Attempted corrections ranged from -2.25 to -6.50 D with 0 to 1.00 D of astigmatism. The absolute change in refractive astigmatism was calculated by taking the difference in magnitudes of astigmatism before and after laser treatment without regard to axis. Axis and magnitude of SIA were analyzed by vector differences. Magnitudes were compared using the Student t test, and axial shifts were compared using the chi-square test. All patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months. RESULTS: The mean changes in absolute astigmatism were 0.29 +/- 0.28 D at 3 months and 0.34 +/- 0.29 D at 6 months after hyperopic PRK and 0.40 +/- 0.35 D at 3 months and 0.39 +/- 0.36 D at 6 months after myopic PRK. The mean vectoral magnitudes were 0.49 +/- 0.29 at 3 months and 0.52 +/- 0.25 at 6 months after hyperopic PRK and 0.48 +/- 0.39 at 3 months and 0.44 +/- 0.38 at 6 months after myopic PRK. The mean values for SIA (the centroid) were 0.10 +/- 0.57 D x 113 degrees at 3 months and 0.15 +/- 0.57 D x 131 degrees at 6 months after hyperopic PRK and 0.04 +/- 0.63 D x 160 degrees at 3 months and 0.08 +/- 0.58 D x 171 degrees at 6 months after myopic PRK. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in vectoral axis or magnitude of SIA. CONCLUSION: Surgically induced astigmatism after hyperopic PRK was comparable to astigmatism induced by myopic PRK. A peripheral annular ablation for hyperopic correction, similar to a central ablation in myopic PRK, did not appear to result in uneven corneal healing causing astigmatism.     

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.     

Correlation among refractive, keratometric and topographic astigmatism after myopic photorefractive keratectomy

BACKGROUND: Photorefrative keratectomy can be used to flatten the curvature of the anterior cornea and reduce the myopic refraction of the eye. This leads to unphysiological topographical changes of the cornea and may alter the conditions for examinations of corneal surface topography. The purpose of this study was to check for mutual agreement of three different methods of assessment of astigmatism before and after myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven eyes of 28 patients (age 32.7+/-6.6 years) following PRK using an 193-nm excimer laser were included in this study. 37 eyes were treated for pure myopia (-4.9+/-2.4 D) and 10 eyes for myopic astigmatism (sphere -2.0 to -7.0 D, cylinder -1.0 to -3.0 D). Preoperatively and at 18 months postoperatively, subjective refractometry, keratometry and topography analysis were performed. The axes of topographic and keratometric cylinder were standardized periodically (180 degrees) with respect to the refractive cylinder axis. RESULTS: Pre- and postoperatively, the absolute astigmatism values correlated highly significantly between all three methods (P< or =0.001). The mean refractive cylinder was 0.65+/-0.61 D preoperatively and 0.46+/-0.41 D postoperatively (P=0.2). The mean keratometric astigmatism was 1.14+/-0.64 D before and 0.94+/-0.50 D after PRK treatment (P=0.2). Among the three methods, the mean topographic astigmatism was the highest (P<0.001) preoperatively (1.31+/-0.56 D) and postoperatively (1.21+/-0.52 D) (P=0.3). In eyes treated for pure myopia, no difference between pre- and postoperative refractive, keratometric and topographic astigmatism was detected (P>0.5). The axes of both topographic and keratometric astigmatism correlated highly significantly with the refractive cylinder axis (R> or =30.9, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Up to 2 years after myopic PRK, the difference between refractive and keratometric astigmatism does not differ from the preoperative value, indicating an even corneal surface. The absolute astigmatism values and the cylinder axis correlated well between subjective and objective methods of astigmatism assessment. Thus, objective measurements may be helpful in determining the cylinder component of best spectacle correction after PRK. However, topographic analysis overestimates astigmatism values systematically before and after PRK.     

Predictability and outcomes of photoastigmatic keratectomy using the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of astigmatic correction on the accuracy of the myopic and astigmatic correction in patients having photorefractive astigmatic keratectomy (PARK) and in those having photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). SETTING: Specialist excimer laser refractive clinic. METHODS: This prospective consecutive case series comprised 6097 eyes with a preoperative mean spherical equivalent (MSE) of -4.63 diopters (D) +/- 1.95 (SD) (range -0.75 to -13.00 D) and a mean cylinder of -1.13 +/- 0.73 D (range -0.50 to -6.00 D) having PARK with a Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser. Visual and refractive outcomes were assessed 12 months postoperatively and compared with those in 3004 eyes that had spherical PRK. RESULTS: At 12 months, the MSE was -0.02 +/- 0.79 D and the mean cylinder was -0.49 +/- 0.47 D in the PARK group; the MSE was -0.07 +/- 0.66 D in the PRK group. An MSE within +/-0.05 D of emmetropia was achieved by 69.8% and within +/-1.00 D, by 87.9%. The uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 20/20 or better in 42.6% and 20/40 or better in 91.2%. Statistical significance (P <.001, analysis of variance) was achieved for MSE, sphere, cylinder, haze, and visual acuity (best corrected [BCVA] and UCVA) based on the preoperative cylinder. The loss of BCVA varied from 1.1% to 5.8% depending on the degree of astigmatism treated. Accuracy varied with the attempted myopic correction and the attempted astigmatic correction. CONCLUSIONS: Excimer laser PARK was an effective treatment for compound myopic astigmatism, but predictability decreased and complications increased as the attempted astigmatic correction increased.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy for low, moderate, and high astigmatism using a broad beam excimer laser: evaluataion according to new international criteria

BACKGROUND: Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is an accepted procedure to correct myopia in Germany. The purpose of this study was to evaluate photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK) for myopic astigmatism. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PARK using the VISX 20/20 excimer laser was performed in 50 eyes of 36 patients (25 female, 16 male) aged 22 to 68 years (mean 38 +/- 10 years) in the period of 1995 to 1996. Retrospective evaluation was done after dividing the patients into three astigmatic groups between -0.5 diopters (D) and -1.5 D (group I, n = 28), between -1.75 D and -3.0 D (group II, n = 16) und between -3.25 D and -5.5 D (group III, n = 6). The correction of myopic astigmatism was assessed concerning the criteria safety, efficacy, predictability and stability. Mean follow-up was 12 months (8-15 months). RESULTS: Seventy-eight % of all eyes achieved an uncorrected visual acuity of > 0.5. Sixty-eight % of the eyes were within +/- 1.0 D of the desired correction. Loss of 2 or more lines of best corrected visual acuity occurred in 6 eyes (12.0%). We observed in group I an astigmatic reduction of 36.0%, in group II of 66.5% and in group III of 68.0%. The surgically induced astigmatism was calculated with 1.29 +/- 1.0 D. Mean axis rotation of the refractive cylinder was 22.12 +/- 23.05 degrees. CONCLUSIONS: PARK using the VISX 20/20 excimer laser is an acceptable procedure to correct myopic astigmatism. However, the study revealed that astigmatic reduction with a broad beam laser is not yet perfect in terms of efficacy, predictability and safety.     

Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy for high myopia and myopic astigmatism.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy, safety, and predictability of excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy of high myopia and myopic astigmatism. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 76 eyes of 52 patients with myopia from -8.00 to -23.50 diopters (D) with or without astigmatism up to -5.50D were treated with the VISX 20/20 excimer laser (VISK, Santa Clara, CA) and a multi-zone ablation technique. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, corneal haze, and topography were evaluated at 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Postoperative refractions were generally stable after 12 months. At the last follow-up all patients were within - 1.96 D of the intended correction. Eighteen months postoperatively, 68% of patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and 65% of patients undergoing photo astigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK), were within 1 D of planned refraction. Furthermore, 87% of patients after PRK and 80% of patients after PARK had a visual acuity of 20/40 or better. CONCLUSIONS: High myopia with or without astigmatism was successfully treated in most of the patients using PRK. The stability of the postoperative refraction during the first 18 months seems to be good. The incidence of adverse effects was low but improvements in the future should further reduce complications, thus increasing the safety of refractive procedures.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia up to -11 diopters with up to -5 diopters of astigmatism with the summit autonomous LADARVision excimer laser system

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of the Summit Autonomous LADARVision active tracking narrow beam excimer laser system for laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) correction of myopia and astigmatism. DESIGN: A multicenter, prospective noncomparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: This cohort consisted of 177 eyes corrected for spherical myopia up to -11 diopters (D) and 170 eyes corrected for myopia up to -11 D spherical equivalent with astigmatism up to -5 D. INTERVENTION: Treatments were performed at four sites in the United States using a 6-mm optic zone for spherical myopes and a 5.5-mm optic zone with a 1-mm blend for astigmats. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual acuity, subjective refraction, vector analysis, subject satisfaction, intraocular pressure, complications, and adverse reactions. RESULTS: Six-month follow-up was available on 157 spherical eyes and 113 astigmatic eyes. For spherical myopes, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 20/20 or better in 60.5%, 20/25 or better in 80.3%, and 20/40 or better in 93.9%. The mean spherical equivalent was -0.29 +/- 0.45 D with 75.2% +/- 0.50 D and 94.9% +/- 1.00 D of intended. A loss of two lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) occurred in 0.6%, and no eyes lost greater than two lines of BSCVA. For astigmatic myopes, UCVA was 20/20 or better in 52.0%, 20/25 or better in 74.5%, and 20/40 or better in 94.1%. The mean spherical equivalent was -0.23 +/- 0.49 D with 75.2% +/- 0.50 D and 95.6% +/- 1.00 D of intended. A loss of two lines of BSCVA occurred in 0.9%, and no eyes lost greater than two lines of BSCVA. Vector analysis showed that 99% of the intended cylinder was corrected on average with a mean angle of error of 4.2 degrees. Refractive stability was achieved between 1 and 3 months in 97.5% of spherical eyes and 99.4% of astigmatic eyes and confirmed between 3 and 6 months in 100% of both spherical and astigmatic eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Eyes treated for myopia up to -11 D of spherical equivalent with or without astigmatism up to -5 D show early refractive stability, good UCVA outcomes, no significant loss of BSCVA, accurate correction of astigmatism, and slight undercorrection without a change from the photorefractive keratectomy algorithm and with a single treatment.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, predictability, and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. METHODS: This retrospective study comprised 69 eyes that had LASIK to correct myopia and 74 eyes that had LASIK to correct myopic astigmatism. The excimer laser keratectomy was performed using a Summit Apex Plus machine. Refraction, visual acuity, and computerized corneal videokeratography data from the preoperative and postoperative examinations were collected. The astigmatic change was calculated by the Alpins vector analysis method. RESULTS: The preoperative spherical equivalent at the glasses plane in the myopia and myopic astigmatism groups was -8.08 diopters (D) and -9.73 D, respectively. At 6 months, the spherical equivalent and residual corneal astigmatism were -0.25 D and 0.85 D, respectively, in the myopia group and -0.71 D and 0.82 D, respectively, in the myopic astigmatism group. In the myopia group, 88% of eyes were within +/-1.0 D of the intended myopia correction and in the myopic astigmatism group, 85% were within +/-1.0 D of the targeted spherical equivalent and 90% were within +/-1.0 D of the intended astigmatism correction. The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 94.1% of eyes in the myopia group and 92.5% of eyes in the myopic astigmatism group. The SIA magnitude was 0.66 D with the axis randomly distributed in the myopia group. The mean astigmatism correction index was 0.97, the mean magnitude of error was 0.13 D +/- 0.62 (SD), and the mean angle of error was -3.70 +/- 13.73 degrees in the myopic astigmatism group. CONCLUSION: Laser in situ keratomileusis had similar predictability, safety, and efficacy in the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. The astigmatism correction was effective, but the results suggest that subjective astigmatism of less than 1.0 D need not be treated with the Summit Apex Plus laser.