Literature DB >> 20494773

Femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis versus conductive keratoplasty to obtain monovision in patients with emmetropic presbyopia.

Mohammad Ghassan Ayoubi1, Antonio Leccisotti, Edward A Goodall, Victoria E McGilligan, Tara C B Moore.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction after femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and conductive keratoplasty (CK).
SETTING: Private laser clinics, Reading and Southampton, United Kingdom.
METHODS: In this retrospective consecutive single-surgeon comparative study, presbyopic emmetropia was treated with femtosecond LASIK or CK to achieve monovision by targeting -1.50 diopters (D) of myopia in the nondominant eye after a successful monovision contact lens trial. The CK treatments were performed with a ViewPoint CK system using the light-touch technique. The femtosecond LASIK was performed using an IntraLase FS/FS30 and EC-5000 platform with OPDCAT wavefront treatment.
RESULTS: The mean spherical equivalent 12 months postoperatively was -1.63 D +/- 0.68 (SD) in the femtosecond LASIK group and -0.97 +/- 0.82 D in the CK group (P<.001). The mean vector value of astigmatism at 12 months was 0.32 +/- 0.32 D and 1.00 +/- 0.75 D, respectively (P<.0001). The mean induced higher-order aberration (HOA) was 0.45 +/- 0.28 microm in the femtosecond LASIK group and 1.13 +/- 0.25 microm in the CK group (P<.0001). The retreatment rate was 3% after femtosecond LASIK and 50% after CK (P<.0001). On a questionnaire administered at 12 months, 20 patients (62.5%) in the femtosecond LASIK group and 11 patients (34.4%) in the CK group reported being satisfied (P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: In emmetropic presbyopic cases, femtosecond LASIK monovision provided stable correction with less induced astigmatism and HOA. Eyes with CK monovision had regression and induced astigmatism. (c) 2010 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20494773     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.12.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  7 in total

Review 1.  Refractive surgery beyond 2020.

Authors:  Marcus Ang; Damien Gatinel; Dan Z Reinstein; Erik Mertens; Jorge L Alió Del Barrio; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  Pseudophakic monovision is an important surgical approach to being spectacle-free.

Authors:  Jianhe Xiao; Caihui Jiang; Maonian Zhang
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.848

3.  Binocular function to increase visual outcome in patients implanted with a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Florian T A Kretz; Matthias Müller; Matthias Gerl; Ralf H Gerl; Gerd U Auffarth
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 2.209

4.  Monovision LASIK in emmetropic presbyopic patients.

Authors:  Michelle Y Peng; Stephen Hannan; David Teenan; Steven J Schallhorn; Julie M Schallhorn
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-04

Review 5.  Presbyopia - A Review of Current Treatment Options and Emerging Therapies.

Authors:  James A Katz; Paul M Karpecki; Alexandra Dorca; Sima Chiva-Razavi; Heather Floyd; Elizabeth Barnes; Mark Wuttke; Eric Donnenfeld
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-05-24

Review 6.  Presbyopic correction on the cornea.

Authors:  Samuel Arba Mosquera; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  Eye Vis (Lond)       Date:  2014-11-13

Review 7.  Current management of presbyopia.

Authors:  Pandelis A Papadopoulos; Alexandros P Papadopoulos
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014 Jan-Mar
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.