Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
BACKGROUND: A systematic method of performing radial keratotomy enhancements in undercorrected eyes may increase accuracy and predictability and decrease the number of procedures required. A consecutive series of 372 radial keratotomy procedures, including 110 eyes that received enhancements under a systematic protocol, was evaluated. METHODS: Radial keratotomy was performed using the Reliable Keratotomy software, which uses the Thornton nomogram for primary radial keratotomy and provides a systematic method of performing enhancements. RESULTS: Ninety eyes (24%) received one enhancement, 16 eyes (4%) received two enhancements, and four eyes (1%) received three enhancements. Mean final spherical equivalent refraction was -0.44 D (-4.00 to +1.875 D, SD 0.86) for eyes that did not receive enhancements and -0.44 D (-2.50 to +1.00 D, SD 0.61) for eyes that had enhancements. Mean final residual myopia for the entire cohort was -0.44 D (-4.00 to +1,875 D, SD 0.79). At final examination, 242 (65%) eyes had a refraction within ±0.50 D and 298 (80%) within ±1.00. Among eyes that received enhancements, 75 (68%) had a refraction within ±0.50 D, and 89 (81%) within ±1.00 D; 40 eyes (36%) had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 99 eyes (90%) 20/40 or better, and all but one eye (99%) 20/80 or better at the final postoperative examination. Among the entire cohort, 130 eyes (35%) had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 312 (84%) had 20/40 or better, and 350 (94%) had 20/80 or better. No eye lost more than one line of spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach to enhancement of undereorrected eyes after radial keratotomy, combined with accurate surgery, may reduce the need for multiple enhancements as well as the overcorrection rate, and provide improved uncorrected visual acuity. [J Refract Surg 1997;13:374-381]
BACKGROUND: A systematic method of performing radial keratotomy enhancements in undercorrected eyes may increase accuracy and predictability and decrease the number of procedures required. A consecutive series of 372 radial keratotomy procedures, including 110 eyes that received enhancements under a systematic protocol, was evaluated. METHODS: Radial keratotomy was performed using the Reliable Keratotomy software, which uses the Thornton nomogram for primary radial keratotomy and provides a systematic method of performing enhancements. RESULTS: Ninety eyes (24%) received one enhancement, 16 eyes (4%) received two enhancements, and four eyes (1%) received three enhancements. Mean final spherical equivalent refraction was -0.44 D (-4.00 to +1.875 D, SD 0.86) for eyes that did not receive enhancements and -0.44 D (-2.50 to +1.00 D, SD 0.61) for eyes that had enhancements. Mean final residual myopia for the entire cohort was -0.44 D (-4.00 to +1,875 D, SD 0.79). At final examination, 242 (65%) eyes had a refraction within ±0.50 D and 298 (80%) within ±1.00. Among eyes that received enhancements, 75 (68%) had a refraction within ±0.50 D, and 89 (81%) within ±1.00 D; 40 eyes (36%) had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 99 eyes (90%) 20/40 or better, and all but one eye (99%) 20/80 or better at the final postoperative examination. Among the entire cohort, 130 eyes (35%) had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better, 312 (84%) had 20/40 or better, and 350 (94%) had 20/80 or better. No eye lost more than one line of spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach to enhancement of undereorrected eyes after radial keratotomy, combined with accurate surgery, may reduce the need for multiple enhancements as well as the overcorrection rate, and provide improved uncorrected visual acuity. [J Refract Surg 1997;13:374-381]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.