Taehyung Lim1, Sungjae Yang, Myoungjoon Kim, Hungwon Tchah. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 388-1 Pungnap-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul 138-736, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes between the IntraLase femtosecond laser and the mechanical microkeratome for creating flaps during laser in situ keratomileusis. DESIGN: Nonrandomized clinical trial. METHODS: The study involved a total of 55 eyes of 30 patients, with 27 eyes of 16 patients comprising the microkeratome group and 28 eyes of 14 patients comprising the IntraLase group. Refractive errors, visual acuity, higher-order aberrations, contrast sensitivity, and corneal sensitivity were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of refractive errors and postoperative uncorrected visual acuity. There was no loss of best-corrected visual acuity in either group. The higher-order aberrations were similar in both groups (P > .05), except for spherical aberration, which was greater in the microkeratome group (P < .05). In the IntraLase group, the contrast sensitivity value at 12 and 18 cycles per degree under mesopic conditions was significantly improved at three months postoperatively (P < .05). The IntraLase group showed faster corneal sensitivity recovery compared with the microkeratome group, and corneal sensitivity in the peripheral area was nearly normalized at three months postoperatively in the IntraLase group. CONCLUSIONS: The femtosecond laser may have advantages over the microkeratome in the flap-making procedure. However, the IntraLase femtosecond laser failed to have significant superiority over the mechanical microkeratome in clinical outcomes, except for faster recovery of corneal sensation, lesser degree of spherical aberration, and some contrast sensitivity value.
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes between the IntraLase femtosecond laser and the mechanical microkeratome for creating flaps during laser in situ keratomileusis. DESIGN: Nonrandomized clinical trial. METHODS: The study involved a total of 55 eyes of 30 patients, with 27 eyes of 16 patients comprising the microkeratome group and 28 eyes of 14 patients comprising the IntraLase group. Refractive errors, visual acuity, higher-order aberrations, contrast sensitivity, and corneal sensitivity were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of refractive errors and postoperative uncorrected visual acuity. There was no loss of best-corrected visual acuity in either group. The higher-order aberrations were similar in both groups (P > .05), except for spherical aberration, which was greater in the microkeratome group (P < .05). In the IntraLase group, the contrast sensitivity value at 12 and 18 cycles per degree under mesopic conditions was significantly improved at three months postoperatively (P < .05). The IntraLase group showed faster corneal sensitivity recovery compared with the microkeratome group, and corneal sensitivity in the peripheral area was nearly normalized at three months postoperatively in the IntraLase group. CONCLUSIONS: The femtosecond laser may have advantages over the microkeratome in the flap-making procedure. However, the IntraLase femtosecond laser failed to have significant superiority over the mechanical microkeratome in clinical outcomes, except for faster recovery of corneal sensation, lesser degree of spherical aberration, and some contrast sensitivity value.