Ryan P McNabb1, Sina Farsiu2, Sandra S Stinnett3, Joseph A Izatt2, Anthony N Kuo4. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: ryan.mcnabb@duke.edu. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the ability of motion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) to measure the corneal refractive power change due to LASIK. DESIGN: Evaluation of a diagnostic test or technology in a cohort. SUBJECTS: A total of 70 eyes from 37 subjects undergoing LASIK were measured preoperatively. A total of 39 eyes from 22 subjects were measured postoperatively and completed the study. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing LASIK at the Duke Eye Center who consented to participate were imaged with Placido-ring topography, Scheimpflug photography, and OCT on the day of their surgery. Patients were then reimaged with the same imaging systems at the postoperative month 3 visit. Change in preoperative to postoperative corneal refractive power as measured by each of the imaging modalities was compared with the preoperative to postoperative change in manifest refraction (MRx) using the t test with generalized estimating equations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corneal refractive power change due to LASIK as measured by Placido-ring topography, Scheimpflug photography, and OCT compared with the MRx change vertexed to the corneal plane. The change in MRx should correspond to the change in the corneal refractive power from LASIK and was considered the reference measurement. RESULTS: In 22 individuals (39 eyes) returning after LASIK, we found no significant difference between the clinically measured pre- to post-LASIK change in MRx and both Scheimpflug photography (P = 0.714) and OCT (P = 0.216). In contrast, keratometry values from Placido-ring topography were found to be significantly different from the measured refractive change (P < 0.001). In addition, of the 3 imaging modalities, OCT recorded the smallest mean absolute difference from the reference measurement with the least amount of variability. CONCLUSIONS: Motion-corrected OCT more accurately measures the change in corneal refractive power due to laser refractive surgery than other currently available clinical devices. By offering accurate corneal refractive power measurements in normal and surgically modified subjects, OCT offers a compelling alternative to current clinical devices for determining corneal refractive power.
PURPOSE: To determine the ability of motion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) to measure the corneal refractive power change due to LASIK. DESIGN: Evaluation of a diagnostic test or technology in a cohort. SUBJECTS: A total of 70 eyes from 37 subjects undergoing LASIK were measured preoperatively. A total of 39 eyes from 22 subjects were measured postoperatively and completed the study. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing LASIK at the Duke Eye Center who consented to participate were imaged with Placido-ring topography, Scheimpflug photography, and OCT on the day of their surgery. Patients were then reimaged with the same imaging systems at the postoperative month 3 visit. Change in preoperative to postoperative corneal refractive power as measured by each of the imaging modalities was compared with the preoperative to postoperative change in manifest refraction (MRx) using the t test with generalized estimating equations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corneal refractive power change due to LASIK as measured by Placido-ring topography, Scheimpflug photography, and OCT compared with the MRx change vertexed to the corneal plane. The change in MRx should correspond to the change in the corneal refractive power from LASIK and was considered the reference measurement. RESULTS: In 22 individuals (39 eyes) returning after LASIK, we found no significant difference between the clinically measured pre- to post-LASIK change in MRx and both Scheimpflug photography (P = 0.714) and OCT (P = 0.216). In contrast, keratometry values from Placido-ring topography were found to be significantly different from the measured refractive change (P < 0.001). In addition, of the 3 imaging modalities, OCT recorded the smallest mean absolute difference from the reference measurement with the least amount of variability. CONCLUSIONS: Motion-corrected OCT more accurately measures the change in corneal refractive power due to laser refractive surgery than other currently available clinical devices. By offering accurate corneal refractive power measurements in normal and surgically modified subjects, OCT offers a compelling alternative to current clinical devices for determining corneal refractive power.
Authors: Maciej Wojtkowski; Rainer Leitgeb; Andrzej Kowalczyk; Tomasz Bajraszewski; Adolf F Fercher Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 3.170
Authors: Robert A Latkany; Amit R Chokshi; Mark G Speaker; Jodi Abramson; Barrie D Soloway; Guopei Yu Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Vahid Feiz; Majid Moshirfar; Mark J Mannis; Charles D Reilly; Francisco Garcia-Ferrer; Jeffrey J Caspar; Michele C Lim Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ryan P McNabb; Francesco Larocca; Sina Farsiu; Anthony N Kuo; Joseph A Izatt Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2012-08-10 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Ryan P McNabb; James Polans; Brenton Keller; Moseph Jackson-Atogi; Charlene L James; Robin R Vann; Joseph A Izatt; Anthony N Kuo Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Oscar M Carrasco-Zevallos; Christian Viehland; Brenton Keller; Mark Draelos; Anthony N Kuo; Cynthia A Toth; Joseph A Izatt Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: José Lezama; Dibyendu Mukherjee; Ryan P McNabb; Guillermo Sapiro; Anthony N Kuo; Sina Farsiu Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Liangbo Shen; Oscar Carrasco-Zevallos; Brenton Keller; Christian Viehland; Gar Waterman; Paul S Hahn; Anthony N Kuo; Cynthia A Toth; Joseph A Izatt Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2016-04-06 Impact factor: 3.732