PURPOSE: To compare wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK in patients with myopic astigmatism up to -7.00 diopters (D) sphere and 3.00 D cylinder. METHODS: In this prospective, comparative study, 41 patients had wavefront-guided LASIK in one eye and wavefront-optimized LASIK in the fellow eye. The LASIK flap was created with a Hansatome XP microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb). The ALLEGRETTO Concerto excimer laser (WaveLight Laser Technologie AG) was used for photoablation. Pupil centroid shift and cyclotorsion were not compensated in the wavefront-guided treatments. The ALLEGRETTO Wave analyzer was used to measure ocular wavefront aberrations, and the CSV-1000 instrument (VectorVision) was used to measure contrast sensitivity before and 1 and 3 months after LASIK. RESULTS:Preoperative mean spherical equivalent refraction was -4.25±1.19 D (range: -7.50 to -2.50 D) and -4.15±1.21 D (range: -7.13 to -1.75 D) in the wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized groups, respectively. Three months postoperatively, 33 (89.2%) eyes in the wavefront-guided group and 31 (83.8%) eyes in the wavefront-optimized group had uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20. Higher order aberrations increased from 0.28±0.08 μm (range: 0.13 to 0.48 μm) and 0.26±0.08 μm (range: 0.13 to 0.55 μm) to 0.45±0.17 μm (range: 0.18 to 0.71 μm) and 0.45±0.16 μm (range: 0.21 to 0.84 μm) in the wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized groups, respectively. Except for C6 trefoil (P=.006), all Zernike polynomials increased in both groups postoperatively with no statistical difference between groups in spherical aberration (P=.41), C7 coma (P=.67), C8 coma (P=.79), and trefoil (P=.82). Contrast sensitivity did not decrease in either group and no statistically significant differences between groups were noted. CONCLUSIONS:Higher order aberrations, especially spherical aberration, increasd approximately the same amount in both groups. Copyright 2011, SLACK Incorporated.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK in patients with myopic astigmatism up to -7.00 diopters (D) sphere and 3.00 D cylinder. METHODS: In this prospective, comparative study, 41 patients had wavefront-guided LASIK in one eye and wavefront-optimized LASIK in the fellow eye. The LASIK flap was created with a Hansatome XP microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb). The ALLEGRETTO Concerto excimer laser (WaveLight Laser Technologie AG) was used for photoablation. Pupil centroid shift and cyclotorsion were not compensated in the wavefront-guided treatments. The ALLEGRETTO Wave analyzer was used to measure ocular wavefront aberrations, and the CSV-1000 instrument (VectorVision) was used to measure contrast sensitivity before and 1 and 3 months after LASIK. RESULTS: Preoperative mean spherical equivalent refraction was -4.25±1.19 D (range: -7.50 to -2.50 D) and -4.15±1.21 D (range: -7.13 to -1.75 D) in the wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized groups, respectively. Three months postoperatively, 33 (89.2%) eyes in the wavefront-guided group and 31 (83.8%) eyes in the wavefront-optimized group had uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20. Higher order aberrations increased from 0.28±0.08 μm (range: 0.13 to 0.48 μm) and 0.26±0.08 μm (range: 0.13 to 0.55 μm) to 0.45±0.17 μm (range: 0.18 to 0.71 μm) and 0.45±0.16 μm (range: 0.21 to 0.84 μm) in the wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized groups, respectively. Except for C6 trefoil (P=.006), all Zernike polynomials increased in both groups postoperatively with no statistical difference between groups in spherical aberration (P=.41), C7 coma (P=.67), C8 coma (P=.79), and trefoil (P=.82). Contrast sensitivity did not decrease in either group and no statistically significant differences between groups were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Higher order aberrations, especially spherical aberration, increasd approximately the same amount in both groups. Copyright 2011, SLACK Incorporated.
Authors: Majid Moshirfar; Brent S Betts; Daniel S Churgin; Maylon Hsu; Marcus Neuffer; Shameema Sikder; Dane Church; Mark D Mifflin Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2011-09-20
Authors: Majid Moshirfar; Daniel S Churgin; Brent S Betts; Maylon Hsu; Shameema Sikder; Marcus Neuffer; Dane Church; Mark D Mifflin Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2011-08-22
Authors: Kevin M Broderick; Rose K Sia; Denise S Ryan; Richard D Stutzman; Michael J Mines; Travis C Frazier; Mark F Torres; Kraig S Bower Journal: Eye Vis (Lond) Date: 2016-02-11
Authors: Khaled M Hamam; Mohamed I Gbreel; Randa Elsheikh; Amira Y Benmelouka; Yassamine Ouerdane; Amr K Hassan; Aboalmagd Hamdallah; Ahmed B Elsnhory; Anas Z Nourelden; Ahmed T Masoud; Asmaa A Ali; Khaled M Ragab; Ahmed M Ibrahim Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 1.848