Paul J Dougherty1, Harkaran S Bains. 1. Dougherty Laser Vision Institute, 1821 Daily Dr, Camarillo, CA 93010, USA. info@doughertylaservision.com
Abstract
UNLABELLED: POSE: To compare visual, refractive, and safety outcomes among a non-wavefront scanning-slit laser (NIDEK EC-5000) and wavefront-driven lasers (Alcon CustomCornea and VISX CustomVue). METHODS: A retrospective comparison of outcomes for 290 eyes that underwent LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism with either a conventional or custom ablation excimer laser system were compared. The preoperative refractive error and age of the patients were matched. Outcomes were tested for statistically significant differences among the conventional laser and each of the custom ablation lasers. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. Data with 3-month follow-up are reported. RESULTS: Postoperatively, mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent was -0.12+/-0.31 diopters (D) (range: -1.50 to 0.75 D) for the NIDEK group, -0.13+/-0.39 D (range: -1.88 to 0.75 D) for the VISX group, and -0.06+/-0.26 D (range: -0.75 to 0.75 D) for the Alcon group. Eighty-nine percent of eyes in the NIDEK group, 88% of eyes in the VISX group, and 92% of eyes in the Alcon group were within a half-diopter of intended correction. None of the NIDEK and VISX eyes and 3% of Alcon eyes lost 2 or more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. No statistically significant differences in any of the outcomes studied between conventional and custom ablation treatments were noted (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were observed in safety, efficacy, or predictability of eyes that underwent conventional ablation with the NIDEK EC-5000 scanning slit laser compared to custom ablation with the VISX CustomVue or Alcon CustomCornea laser systems.
UNLABELLED: POSE: To compare visual, refractive, and safety outcomes among a non-wavefront scanning-slit laser (NIDEK EC-5000) and wavefront-driven lasers (Alcon CustomCornea and VISX CustomVue). METHODS: A retrospective comparison of outcomes for 290 eyes that underwent LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism with either a conventional or custom ablation excimer laser system were compared. The preoperative refractive error and age of the patients were matched. Outcomes were tested for statistically significant differences among the conventional laser and each of the custom ablation lasers. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. Data with 3-month follow-up are reported. RESULTS: Postoperatively, mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent was -0.12+/-0.31 diopters (D) (range: -1.50 to 0.75 D) for the NIDEK group, -0.13+/-0.39 D (range: -1.88 to 0.75 D) for the VISX group, and -0.06+/-0.26 D (range: -0.75 to 0.75 D) for the Alcon group. Eighty-nine percent of eyes in the NIDEK group, 88% of eyes in the VISX group, and 92% of eyes in the Alcon group were within a half-diopter of intended correction. None of the NIDEK and VISX eyes and 3% of Alcon eyes lost 2 or more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. No statistically significant differences in any of the outcomes studied between conventional and custom ablation treatments were noted (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were observed in safety, efficacy, or predictability of eyes that underwent conventional ablation with the NIDEK EC-5000 scanning slit laser compared to custom ablation with the VISX CustomVue or Alcon CustomCornea laser systems.