Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Wavefront-Guided and Wavefront-Optimized Laser in Situ Keratomileusis

Roe, Joshua; Manche, Edward E.

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2019.05.026

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This agrees with the results of Perez-Straziota et al [ 6 ], Meidani and Tzavara [ 28 ], Hassan et al [ 29 ], and Mahmoud et al [ 30 ]. On the other hand, our results were different from those reported by He et al [ 17 ], Ghoneim et al [ 31 ], and Roe and Manche [ 23 ], where WFG appeared to be superior to WFO ( P = 0.016). This can be explained by the contralateral-eye design, which eliminates confounding factors specific to individual patients, such as wound healing and corneal mechanical properties.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have compared the efficacy of WFO and WFG platforms for myopic correction and concluded that the two yield largely equivalent outcomes [4,17]. These studies are summarized in Table 4 [3][4][5][6][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. FOZ has also been used as an effective tool for the assessment and comparison of different laser refractive surgery modalities [8,9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Elshawarby¹,

Saad²,

Helmy³

et al. 2021

Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Many studies have used functional optical zone (FOZ) as a measure to compare different refractive laser treatment modalities. However, to our knowledge, no study has compared wavefrontoptimized (WFO) and wavefront-guided (WFG) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using FOZ. We compared the FOZ after WFO versus WFG LASIK in patients with myopia and myopic astigmatism.Methods: In this prospective comparative study, we included 100 myopic eyes of 50 patients with or without astigmatism. They were divided into two groups according to the platform used: WFO or WFG femtosecond LASIK. Using Holladay’s equivalent keratometry reading (EKR) report of Pentacam HR, FOZ was defined as a zone centered on the pupil center with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.5 D, around the mean EKR. The differences in FOZ between the two platforms were analyzed at 3 months postoperatively. Visual acuity, refractive error, corneal asphericity (Q-value), and root mean square of higher-order aberrations (RMS for HOAs) were evaluated and compared.Results: The mean ± SD of patient age was 26.64 ± 5.67 years. The preoperative characteristics of the two groups were comparable (all P > 0.05). The intended optical zone (IOZ) was 6 mm in both groups. The mean laser ablation depth was significantly greater in the WFG group (18 ?m per D) than in the WFO group (16 ?m per D) (P = 0.035). At 3 months postoperatively, the mean ± SD of FOZ diameter was 4.32 ± 0.94 mm (71.99 ± 15.68% of intended optical zone) in the WFO group and 4.16 ± 1.13 mm (69.33 ± 18.78% of intended optical zone) in the WFG group, with no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.622). The change in corneal asphericity was greater in the WFG group than in the WFO group (P = 0.034). Postoperative mean corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, and RMS for HOAs showed no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05).Conclusions: We found that WFG LASIK resulted in greater ablation depth and change in corneal asphericity than WFO LASIK at 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no significant difference in FOZ diameter, refractive error, and RMS for HOAs between the two groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Elshawarby¹,

Saad²,

Helmy³

et al. 2021

Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In sum, WFG PRK affords excellent refractive outcomes and does not represent a compromise in long term outcomes. In fact, with newer technology like the high-resolution wavefront aberrometer based ablations that have been shown to have superior low contrast visual acuity with LASIK, we expect similar results for WFG PRK to be forthcoming in future studies [9].…”

Section: Equivalent Outcomes To Wfg Lasik and Other Refractive Platformsmentioning

confidence: 73%

Pros and cons of wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy

Roe

Manche

2019

Expert Review of Ophthalmology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[ 77 78 ] Wavefront-guided LASIK results in better CS. [ 76 ] xi. Microbial Keratitis Microbial keratitis is a rare sight-threatening complication observed in 0.005%-0.034% cases with decreased incidence over the years.…”

Section: Postoperative Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complications of laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis

Sahay

Bafna

Reddy

et al. 2021

Indian Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is one of the most commonly performed kerato-refractive surgery globally. Since its introduction in 1990, there has been a constant evolution in its technology to improve the visual outcome. The safety, efficacy, and predictability of LASIK are well known, but complications with this procedure, although rare, are not unknown. Literature review suggests that intraoperative complications include suction loss, free cap, flap tear, buttonhole flap, decentered ablation, central island, interface debris, femtosecond laser-related complications, and others. The postoperative complications include flap striae, flap dislocation, residual refractive error, diffuse lamellar keratitis, microbial keratitis, epithelial ingrowth, refractive regression, corneal ectasia, and others. This review aims to provide a comprehensive knowledge of risk factors, clinical features, and management protocol of all the reported complications of LASIK. This knowledge will help in prevention as well as early identification and timely intervention with the appropriate strategy for achieving optimal visual outcome even in the face of complications.

show abstract

Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Wavefront-Guided and Wavefront-Optimized Laser in Situ Keratomileusis

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Pros and cons of wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy

Complications of laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About