Anders H Vestergaard1, Jakob Grauslund2, Anders R Ivarsen2, Jesper Ø Hjortdal2. 1. From the Departments of Ophthalmology, Odense University Hospital (Vestergaard, Grauslund) and Aarhus University Hospital (Vestergaard, Ivarsen, Hjortdal), Aarhus, Denmark. Electronic address: vestergaard_anders@hotmail.com. 2. From the Departments of Ophthalmology, Odense University Hospital (Vestergaard, Grauslund) and Aarhus University Hospital (Vestergaard, Ivarsen, Hjortdal), Aarhus, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare femtosecond lenticule extraction and small-incision lenticule extraction to treat moderate to high myopia. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. DESIGN: Prospective clinical single-masked paired-eye study. METHODS: An intrastromal lenticule was cut by a femtosecond laser and manually extracted. In femtosecond lenticule extraction, a laser in situ keratomileusis-like flap allowed removal of the lenticule, whereas in small-incision lenticule extraction, it was removed through a small incision. Follow-up was 6 months. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were treated with femtosecond lenticule extraction in 1 eye and small-incision lenticule extraction in the other. The mean preoperative spherical equivalent was -7.6 diopters (D) ± 1.0 (SD) (range -6.0 to -9.9 D). After both procedures, 90% of eyes had an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/40 or better 1 day postoperatively, increasing to 100% after 6 months. At 6 months, the mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) improved significantly by approximately 1.5 letters on the logMAR chart. No eyes lost or gained 2 lines or more of CDVA after either procedure. The achieved refraction was a mean of -0.04 ± 0.38 D from the attempted refraction after femtosecond lenticule extraction and -0.09 ± 0.39 D after small-incision lenticule extraction. After both procedures, 88% of eyes were within ±0.50 D. Contrast sensitivity was unchanged. The changes in higher-order aberrations were similar. CONCLUSION: The all-femtosecond laser flap-based and cap-based techniques produced almost identical results up to 6 months postoperatively in eyes with moderate to high myopia.
PURPOSE: To compare femtosecond lenticule extraction and small-incision lenticule extraction to treat moderate to high myopia. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. DESIGN: Prospective clinical single-masked paired-eye study. METHODS: An intrastromal lenticule was cut by a femtosecond laser and manually extracted. In femtosecond lenticule extraction, a laser in situ keratomileusis-like flap allowed removal of the lenticule, whereas in small-incision lenticule extraction, it was removed through a small incision. Follow-up was 6 months. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were treated with femtosecond lenticule extraction in 1 eye and small-incision lenticule extraction in the other. The mean preoperative spherical equivalent was -7.6 diopters (D) ± 1.0 (SD) (range -6.0 to -9.9 D). After both procedures, 90% of eyes had an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/40 or better 1 day postoperatively, increasing to 100% after 6 months. At 6 months, the mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) improved significantly by approximately 1.5 letters on the logMAR chart. No eyes lost or gained 2 lines or more of CDVA after either procedure. The achieved refraction was a mean of -0.04 ± 0.38 D from the attempted refraction after femtosecond lenticule extraction and -0.09 ± 0.39 D after small-incision lenticule extraction. After both procedures, 88% of eyes were within ±0.50 D. Contrast sensitivity was unchanged. The changes in higher-order aberrations were similar. CONCLUSION: The all-femtosecond laser flap-based and cap-based techniques produced almost identical results up to 6 months postoperatively in eyes with moderate to high myopia.
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
Authors: Yu-Chi Liu; Lasitha Jayasinghe; Heng Pei Ang; Nyein Chan Lwin; Gary Hin Fai Yam; Jodhbir S Mehta Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-07-27 Impact factor: 3.411