Laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis complications in diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE: To report the incidence of complications and the refractive results in patients with diabetes mellitus treated with laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). METHODS: A retrospective review of the charts, focusing on 6-month postoperative data, was performed on 30 eyes from patients with diabetes and 150 age- and gender-matched control eyes operated on during the same period. The incidence of complications and postoperative refractive results were compared. The data analyzed include UCVA, spherical equivalent, astigmatism power, astigmatism axis, and vector astigmatism change. RESULTS: Diabetic eyes treated with LASIK had an overall complication rate of 47% compared with the control population complication incidence of 6.9% (p< 0.01). The most frequent complications occurring in the diabetic population are punctate epithelial erosions and persistent epithelial defects. Spherical correction change was -4.64 diopters (D) for diabetic eyes and -4.98 D for control eyes (p= 0.49). Mean spherical equivalent change was -4.69 D for diabetic eyes and -4.75 D for control eyes (p= 0.9). Mean change in uncorrected visual acuity (LogMAR) was 1.5 for diabetic eyes and 1.65 for control eyes (p= 0.18). Mean astigmatism magnitude change was 0.31 in diabetic eyes and 0.57 in control eyes (p= 0.12). Mean vector corrected astigmatism change was 0.97 for diabetic eyes and 1.12 for control eyes (p= 0.31). Mean vector-corrected astigmatism axis for patients with diabetes was 18.17 for diabetic eyes and 6.20 for control eyes (p= 0.30). CONCLUSION: Patients with diabetes who undergo LASIK are at a significantly higher risk of developing postoperative epithelial complications. In addition, this study revealed poorer refractive results in the eyes of patients with diabetes treated with LASIK.     

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 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.     

Arcuate transverse keratotomy remains a useful adjunct to correct astigmatism in conjunction with photorefractive keratectomy

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness of paired, arcuate transverse keratotomy (Arc-T) performed prior to or after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) to correct low to moderate amounts of natural or laser-induced astigmatism. METHODS: Spherical PRK was performed in 730 eyes for myopia of -1.00 to -7.00 D. PRK with arcuate transverse keratotomy was performed in 150 of these eyes; we studied 123 eyes that did not have PRK enhancement. Arc-T was performed prior to PRK in all 37 study eyes with astigmatism of 1.50 D or more at the preoperative examination. Arc-T keratotomy was performed after PRK in 86 study eyes for residual astigmatism of +0.75 D or more and uncorrected visual acuity of 20/30 or worse. RESULTS: Arc-T before PRK group: PRK was performed at a mean 1.0 +/- 1.5 months after Arc-T. Mean astigmatism decreased from +2.40 +/- 0.6 D (range, 1.00 to 4.00 D) before Arc-T to 0.60 +/- 0.60 D (range, 0 to 2.25 D) after Arc-T (P < .0001). Net change in astigmatism was 1.80 +/- 0.60 D (range, 0.80 to 2.80 D) and mean reduction was 75%. Spherical equivalent refraction changed from -4.10 +/- 1.90 D (range, -0.25 to -8.10 D) to -4.40 +/- 1.80 D after Arc-T (P = .002). Mean change in spherical equivalent refraction after Arc-T was -0.30 +/- 0.50 D (range, -1.10 to +0.40 D). Arc-T after PRK group: Arc-T was performed at a mean 3.5 +/- 1.9 months after PRK. Six months after Arc-T, astigmatism was decreased from +1.50 +/- 0.60 D to 0.40 +/- 0.40 D (P = .04). Net change in astigmatism at 6 months was 1.10 +/- 0.60 D and mean reduction was 74%. Vector change in astigmatism magnitude was 1.30 +/- 0.60 D (range, 0 to 4.00 D) at 6 months and vector change in astigmatism axis was 65 degrees +/- 68 degrees. Spherical equivalent refraction did not change when Arc-T was performed after PRK for eyes with low astigmatism (P = .4). Arc-T retreatment was performed in 6 of 37 (16%) eyes that had Arc-T before PRK and 18 of 86 (21%) eyes that had Arc-T after PRK (P = .12). CONCLUSION: Arcuate transverse keratotomy performed prior to PRK for high astigmatism or after PRK for lower levels of residual astigmatism effectively improved visual outcome. Coupling was less predictable for high levels of astigmatism correction with Arc-T.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and hyperopia using the Lasersight 200 laser in 300 consecutive eyes

PURPOSE: To evaluate effectiveness, safety, predictability, and short-term stability of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using the LaserSight Compac-200 Mini excimer laser with software version 9.0, for all refractive errors. METHODS: One hundred fifty consecutive patients (300 eyes) that received bilateral LASIK for myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism were studied prospectively. A new 9.0 software version applying a modified nomogram that takes advantage of bilateral surgery was used. Follow-up at 6 months was available for 267 eyes (89%). RESULTS: Six months postoperatively, 131 eyes (96.32%) in the low to moderate myopia group (-1.00 to -5.99 D; n=136) had a spherical equivalent refraction within +/-1.00 D, and 123 eyes (90.44%) were within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. In the high to extreme myopia group (-6.00 to -25.00 D; n=114), 97 eyes (87.08%) had a spherical equivalent refraction within +/-1.00 D and 78 eyes (68.42%) were within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. In the hyperopia group (+1.00 to +6.00 D; n=50), 44 eyes (88%) had a postoperative spherical equivalent refraction within +/-1.00 D, and 31 eyes (62%) were within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. Mean change in spherical equivalent refraction at 6 months was less than -0.50 D in the low to high myopia groups and -1.16 +/- 0.55 D in the extreme myopia group. At 6 months follow-up, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 73 eyes (54%) in the low to moderate myopia groups and 21 eyes (18%) in the high to extreme myopia groups. In the hyperopia group at 6 months follow-up, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 31 eyes (62%) and 20/40 or better in 41 eyes (82%). Only two eyes had a temporary loss of two or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity due to corneal folds that were surgically treated. Six months after LASIK, no eye had lost any lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity in this series. CONCLUSIONS: Our modified LASIK nomogram with the 9.0 software of the LaserSight 200 excimer laser (with a larger and smoother ablation pattern) resulted in safe and effective outcomes for the treatment of low to high myopia, astigmatism, and hyperopia.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia of -1.50 to -6.00 diopters

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the correction of low and moderate myopia and astigmatism using the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser with a modified algorithm. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-six eyes of 257 patients with myopia ranging from -1.50 to -6.00 D and astigmatism of no more than 4.00 D were included. Manifest spherical equivalent refraction, uncorrected and spectacle-corrected visual acuity were assessed at 1 month (357 eyes, 90%), 3 months (220 eyes, 56%), and 6 months (168 eyes, 42%) after LASIK. RESULTS: Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -3.60 +/- 1.27 D and mean cylinder was -1.01 +/- 1.08 D. Mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -0.12 +/- 0.31 D and mean cylinder was -0.19 +/- 0.33 D. At 6 months follow-up, 158 eyes (94%) had a mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia; 168 eyes (100%) were within +/- 1.00 D. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 81% (136 eyes) and 20/40 or better in 100%. Two eyes (1.2%) lost 1 line of spectacle-corrected visual acuity due to a decentered ablation. No eye lost 2 or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSION: Our modified LASIK algorithm with the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser resulted in safe and predictable outcomes for treatment of low and moderate amounts of myopia and astigmatism.     

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.     

Photorefractive keratectomy with mitomycin C versus LASIK in custom surgeries for myopia: a bilateral prospective randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE: To compare photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) with prophylactic use of mitomycin C (MMC) and LASIK in custom surgeries for myopic astigmatism. METHODS: Eighty-eight eyes of 44 patients with a minimum estimated ablation depth of 50 microm were randomized to receive PRK with MMC 0.002% for 1 minute in one eye and LASIK in the fellow eye. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), cycloplegic refraction, slit-lamp microscopy, contrast sensitivity, specular microscopy, aberrometry, and a subjective questionnaire were evaluated. Forty-two patients completed 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Mean spherical equivalent refraction error before surgery and mean ablation depth were -3.99+/-1.20 diopters (D) and 73.09+/-14.55 microm in LASIK eyes, and -3.85+/-1.12 D and 70.7+/-14.07 microm in PRK with MMC eyes, respectively. Uncorrected visual acuity was significantly better in PRK with MMC eyes 3 months (P=.04) and 6 months (P=.01) after surgery. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity and spherical equivalent refraction did not differ significantly in the groups during follow-up (P>.05). Significant haze was not observed in any PRK with MMC eye. Mean higher order aberration was lower in PRK with MMC eyes postoperatively compared with LASIK eyes (P=.01). Better contrast sensitivity was observed in PRK with MMC eyes than LASIK eyes (P<.05). The endothelial cell count did not differ significantly between groups (P=.65). In terms of visual satisfaction, PRK with MMC eyes were better rated. CONCLUSIONS: Photorefractive keratectomy with MMC appears to be more effective than LASIK in custom surgery for moderate myopia. During 6-month follow-up, no toxic effects of MMC were evident. Long-term follow-up is necessary to attest its safety.     

Toric laser in situ keratomileusis for myopic astigmatism using an ablatable mask

BACKGROUND: To assess the results of toric laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) correction of myopic astigmatism. METHODS: A prospective study was performed over a 20 week period for consecutive patients treated for myopic astigmatism. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity, uncorrected visual acuity, spectacle refraction, videokeratography, and complications were recorded. Vector analysis was performed by the ASSORT program. RESULTS: Sixty-five eyes of 42 patients underwent toric LASIK with a Summit Technologies Apex Plus excimer laser. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent refraction at the spectacle plane was -6.24 +/- 2.42 D (range, -1.63 to -14.63 D) and mean pre-operative refractive cylinder magnitude was 1.99 +/- 1.35 D (range, 0.75 to 7.00 D); mean attempted refractive cylinder correction was 1.90 +/- 1.00 D. Six months after LASIK (43 eyes followed), mean spherical equivalent refraction at the spectacle plane was -0.40 +/- 0.55 D and 31 eyes (72.1%) were within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia. At 6 months, mean refractive cylinder magnitude was 0.74 +/- 0.70 D, mean surgically induced astigmatism was 1.46 +/- 0.86 D, mean absolute angle of error was 10.33 degrees, mean astigmatic correction index was 0.93 +/- 0.36 D, and mean index of success was 0.46 +/- 0.39. Uncorrected visual acuity was 6/12 or better in 34 eyes (79.1%) and 6/6 in 15 eyes (35%); spectacle- corrected visual acuity was 6/9 or better in 41 eyes (95.35%). Six eyes (14.0%) lost 1 line of spectacle-corrected visual acuity at 6 months and one eye (2.3%) lost 2 lines. Ten eyes (23.3%) gained 1 line at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Toric LASIK with an ablatable mask using the Summit Apex Plus excimer laser is a safe and relatively accurate procedure for the correction of myopic astigmatism.     

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.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for compound myopic astigmatism using the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser

PURPOSE: To determine the safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in treating patients with myopic astigmatism using the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser. METHODS: Seventy-four eyes of 42 patients with myopia ranging from -4.50 to -9.88 D and astigmatism ranging from 0.50 to 4.00 D who underwent LASIK with the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser and the Summit Krumeich-Barraquer microkeratome were studied. Patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: Mean baseline spherical equivalent refraction was -7.12 +/- 1.70 D and cylinder was 1.62 +/- 1.72 D. At 12 months, mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -0.49 +/- 0.57 D and mean refractive cylinder was 0.59 +/- 0.32 D. Mean change in spherical equivalent refraction between 1 and 12 months after surgery was -0.09 +/- 0.31 D, toward myopia. At baseline, no eyes had best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) of 20/20 or better, and 65% had 20/40 or better. At 12 months after surgery, 10% of eyes had BSCVA of 20/20 or better and 88% of eyes had 20/40 or better. The unusually low postoperative BSCVA results were thought to be due to amblyopia or existence of a higher percentage of some optical aberrations in this group of eyes. Mean uncorrected visual acuity was -1.38 +/- 0.42 LogMAR units (20/400) at baseline and -0.29 +/- 0.25 LogMAR units (20/40) at the 12-month postoperative examination. No eyes lost two or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity. No vision threatening complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: LASIK with the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser appeared to be safe, effective, reasonably predictable, and stable for correction of myopic astigmatism with a spherical component between -4.25 and -8.25 D and a cylindrical component between 0.50 and 4.00 D. However, astigmatism was slightly undercorrected with the algorithm used.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for correction of induced astigmatism from cataract surgery

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, predictability, stability, and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) to correct residual astigmatism after cataract surgery. METHODS: LASIK was performed on 20 eyes of 20 patients with refractive myopic or mixed astigmatism (3.00 to 6.00 D) at least 1 year after extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation without complication. Each eye received bitoric LASIK with the Nidek EC-5000 excimer laser and the Automated Corneal Shaper microkeratome. RESULTS: At 6 months after LASIK, mean refractive cylinder decreased from 4.64+/-0.63 D to 0.44+/-0.24 D (P<.001). Mean percent reduction of astigmatism was 90.4+/-5.0% (range 80% to 100%). Mean spherical equivalent refraction decreased from -2.19+/-0.88 D (range -1.00 to -3.88 D) to -0.32+/-0.34 D (range -1.25 to +0.38 D) (P<.001). Vector analysis showed that the mean amount of axis deviation was 0.7+/-1.2 degrees (range 0 degrees to 4.3 degrees) and the mean percent correction of preoperative astigmatism was 92.1+/-5.9% (range 85.6% to 108%). Eighty-five percent of all eyes had a mean spherical equivalent refraction and mean cylinder within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia. Change in spherical equivalent refraction and cylinder from 2 weeks to 6 months was < or = 0.50 D in 90% (18 eyes) and 95% (19 eyes), respectively. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not reduced in any eye. Diffuse lamellar keratitis occurred in three eyes (15%) after LASIK, and were treated successfully with eyedrops. CONCLUSION: LASIK was an effective, predictable, stable, and safe procedure for correction of residual myopic or mixed astigmatism ranging from 3.00 to 6.00 D with a low spherical component after cataract surgery.     

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.     

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.     

Intracorneal ring segments after laser in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intracorneal ring segments (ICRS) for correction of residual refractive error in patients previously operated with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). METHODS: Thirteen postoperative LASIK eyes (eight patients) with residual myopic refractive error underwent implantation with INTACS (Keravision) intracorneal ring segments. Correction of the residual error was the first goal, but also improved best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was obtained by correcting residual irregular astigmatism. RESULTS: Mean spherical equivalent refraction improved from -3.25 to +0.75 D and mean uncorrected visual acuity improved from 0.2 to 0.6 after ICRS insertion. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity remained stable or improved; no eyes lost lines of corrected visual acuity. In one of the 13 eyes, the intracorneal ring segments were removed because of progressive stromal melting. CONCLUSIONS: The use of corneal ring segments in selected eyes with residual myopic refractive errors after LASIK was safe and effective.     

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.