Limits...
Clinical outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis to treat moderate-to-high astigmatism.

Schallhorn SC, Venter JA, Hannan SJ, Hettinger KA - Clin Ophthalmol (2015)

Bottom Line: Preoperative refractive cylinder ranged from -2.00 D to -6.00 D (mean -2.76±0.81 D), and the sphere was between 0.00 D and -9.75 D (mean -2.79±2.32 D).The mean correction ratio for refractive cylinder was 0.92±0.14, the mean error of angle was -0.45°±2.99°, and the mean error vector was 0.37±0.38 D.A statistically significant correlation was found between the error of magnitude (arithmetic difference in the magnitudes between surgically induced refractive correction and intended refractive correction) and the intended refractive correction (r=0.26, P<0.01).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA ; Optical Express, Glasgow, UK.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the refractive and visual outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with myopic astigmatism and cylindrical component ≥2.0 diopter (D).

Methods: In this retrospective study, 611 eyes that underwent LASIK for simple or compound myopic astigmatism were analyzed. Preoperative refractive cylinder ranged from -2.00 D to -6.00 D (mean -2.76±0.81 D), and the sphere was between 0.00 D and -9.75 D (mean -2.79±2.32 D). Predictability, visual outcomes, and vector analysis of changes in refractive astigmatism were evaluated.

Results: At 3 months after LASIK, 83.8% of eyes had uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 90.3% had manifest spherical equivalent within ±0.50 D, and 79.1% had residual refractive cylinder within ±0.50 D of intended correction. The mean correction ratio for refractive cylinder was 0.92±0.14, the mean error of angle was -0.45°±2.99°, and the mean error vector was 0.37±0.38 D. A statistically significant correlation was found between the error of magnitude (arithmetic difference in the magnitudes between surgically induced refractive correction and intended refractive correction) and the intended refractive correction (r=0.26, P<0.01).

Conclusion: Wavefront-guided LASIK for the correction of myopic astigmatism is safe, effective, and predictable.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

IRC versus SIRC at 3 months postoperatively.Notes: Green solid line represents the EM within 1.0 D, and green dashed line represents EM within 0.50 D of emmetropia. Solid red line is the linear regression.Abbreviations: IRC, intended refractive correction; SIRC, surgically induced refractive correction; EM, error of magnitude; D, diopter.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4508064&req=5

f3-opth-9-1291: IRC versus SIRC at 3 months postoperatively.Notes: Green solid line represents the EM within 1.0 D, and green dashed line represents EM within 0.50 D of emmetropia. Solid red line is the linear regression.Abbreviations: IRC, intended refractive correction; SIRC, surgically induced refractive correction; EM, error of magnitude; D, diopter.

Mentions: Figure 3 plots the intended refractive correction (IRC) versus surgically induced refractive correction (SIRC) at 3 months, postoperatively. Table 4 summarizes all vector parameters, stratified by the magnitude of preoperative refractive cylinder. The correction ratio for the whole study group was 0.92±0.14, indicating a slight undercorrection. There was a statistically significant correlation between IRC and error vector (r=0.29, P<0.01) and between IRC and error of magnitude (r=0.26, P<0.01). The percentage of eyes with error of angle within 5° and 10° was 89.2% (545 eyes) and 98.4% (601 eyes), respectively.


Clinical outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis to treat moderate-to-high astigmatism.

Schallhorn SC, Venter JA, Hannan SJ, Hettinger KA - Clin Ophthalmol (2015)

IRC versus SIRC at 3 months postoperatively.Notes: Green solid line represents the EM within 1.0 D, and green dashed line represents EM within 0.50 D of emmetropia. Solid red line is the linear regression.Abbreviations: IRC, intended refractive correction; SIRC, surgically induced refractive correction; EM, error of magnitude; D, diopter.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4508064&req=5

f3-opth-9-1291: IRC versus SIRC at 3 months postoperatively.Notes: Green solid line represents the EM within 1.0 D, and green dashed line represents EM within 0.50 D of emmetropia. Solid red line is the linear regression.Abbreviations: IRC, intended refractive correction; SIRC, surgically induced refractive correction; EM, error of magnitude; D, diopter.
Mentions: Figure 3 plots the intended refractive correction (IRC) versus surgically induced refractive correction (SIRC) at 3 months, postoperatively. Table 4 summarizes all vector parameters, stratified by the magnitude of preoperative refractive cylinder. The correction ratio for the whole study group was 0.92±0.14, indicating a slight undercorrection. There was a statistically significant correlation between IRC and error vector (r=0.29, P<0.01) and between IRC and error of magnitude (r=0.26, P<0.01). The percentage of eyes with error of angle within 5° and 10° was 89.2% (545 eyes) and 98.4% (601 eyes), respectively.

Bottom Line: Preoperative refractive cylinder ranged from -2.00 D to -6.00 D (mean -2.76±0.81 D), and the sphere was between 0.00 D and -9.75 D (mean -2.79±2.32 D).The mean correction ratio for refractive cylinder was 0.92±0.14, the mean error of angle was -0.45°±2.99°, and the mean error vector was 0.37±0.38 D.A statistically significant correlation was found between the error of magnitude (arithmetic difference in the magnitudes between surgically induced refractive correction and intended refractive correction) and the intended refractive correction (r=0.26, P<0.01).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA ; Optical Express, Glasgow, UK.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the refractive and visual outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with myopic astigmatism and cylindrical component ≥2.0 diopter (D).

Methods: In this retrospective study, 611 eyes that underwent LASIK for simple or compound myopic astigmatism were analyzed. Preoperative refractive cylinder ranged from -2.00 D to -6.00 D (mean -2.76±0.81 D), and the sphere was between 0.00 D and -9.75 D (mean -2.79±2.32 D). Predictability, visual outcomes, and vector analysis of changes in refractive astigmatism were evaluated.

Results: At 3 months after LASIK, 83.8% of eyes had uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 90.3% had manifest spherical equivalent within ±0.50 D, and 79.1% had residual refractive cylinder within ±0.50 D of intended correction. The mean correction ratio for refractive cylinder was 0.92±0.14, the mean error of angle was -0.45°±2.99°, and the mean error vector was 0.37±0.38 D. A statistically significant correlation was found between the error of magnitude (arithmetic difference in the magnitudes between surgically induced refractive correction and intended refractive correction) and the intended refractive correction (r=0.26, P<0.01).

Conclusion: Wavefront-guided LASIK for the correction of myopic astigmatism is safe, effective, and predictable.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus