Donald R Sanders1. 1. Center For Clinical Research, 242 N York Rd, Ste 102, Elmhurst, IL 60126, USA. drsmd@drsmd.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare matched populations of LASIK and Visian Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) cases in the correction of myopia between -3.00 and -7.88 diopters (D). METHODS: One hundred sixty-four LASIK eyes with prospective data collected from a single center and 164 ICL eyes from the multicenter US ICL Clinical Trial were compared in this observational non-randomized study. The LASIK and ICL groups were well matched for age, gender, and mean level of preoperative spherical equivalent refraction. RESULTS: At 6 months, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) > or = 20/20 was 85% with LASIK and 95% with ICL (P = .003) compared to preoperative values of 93% and 88%, respectively (P = .292). Loss of > or = 2 lines of BSCVA was significantly lower with the ICL at 1 week (0.6% vs 10%, P < .001) and 1 month (7% vs 0%, P = .001) with comparable outcomes at 6 months (0% vs 1%). At 6 months postoperatively, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) > or = 20/15 (11% vs 25%, P = .001) and > or = 20/20 (49% vs 63%, P = .001) was better in the ICL cases. Predictability within 0.50 D at 6 months for ICL cases was 85% (67% LASIK, P < .001); 97% of ICL cases were within 1.00 D (88% LASIK, P = .002). Refractive stability (+/- 0.50 D) between 1 and 6 months was 93% with ICL compared to only 82% with LASIK (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: The ICL performed better than LASIK in almost all measures of safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability in this matched population comparison, supporting the ICL as an effective alternative to existing refractive laser surgical treatments for the range of myopia studied.
PURPOSE: To compare matched populations of LASIK and Visian Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) cases in the correction of myopia between -3.00 and -7.88 diopters (D). METHODS: One hundred sixty-four LASIK eyes with prospective data collected from a single center and 164 ICL eyes from the multicenter US ICL Clinical Trial were compared in this observational non-randomized study. The LASIK and ICL groups were well matched for age, gender, and mean level of preoperative spherical equivalent refraction. RESULTS: At 6 months, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) > or = 20/20 was 85% with LASIK and 95% with ICL (P = .003) compared to preoperative values of 93% and 88%, respectively (P = .292). Loss of > or = 2 lines of BSCVA was significantly lower with the ICL at 1 week (0.6% vs 10%, P < .001) and 1 month (7% vs 0%, P = .001) with comparable outcomes at 6 months (0% vs 1%). At 6 months postoperatively, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) > or = 20/15 (11% vs 25%, P = .001) and > or = 20/20 (49% vs 63%, P = .001) was better in the ICL cases. Predictability within 0.50 D at 6 months for ICL cases was 85% (67% LASIK, P < .001); 97% of ICL cases were within 1.00 D (88% LASIK, P = .002). Refractive stability (+/- 0.50 D) between 1 and 6 months was 93% with ICL compared to only 82% with LASIK (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: The ICL performed better than LASIK in almost all measures of safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability in this matched population comparison, supporting the ICL as an effective alternative to existing refractive laser surgical treatments for the range of myopia studied.