Photorefractive keratectomy for myopia and myopic astigmatism correction using the WaveLight Allegretto Wave Eye-Q excimer laser system

The Effectiveness and Safety of Dextenza 0.4 mg for the Treatment of Postoperative Inflammation and Pain in Patients After Photorefractive Keratectomy: The RESTORE Trial

PURPOSE

To determine patient preference and treatment outcomes with an intracanalicular dexamethasone 0.4 mg insert compared to a standard steroid drop regimen in the contralateral eye following bilateral photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

In this randomized, prospective, self-controlled, open-label interventional study, one eye received the dexamethasone insert and the second eye received prednisolone acetate 1% taper following bilateral PRK surgery. Postoperative evaluations were performed on day 3, day 4, month 1, and month 3. Phone call surveys were performed on week 2. The Comparison of Ophthalmic Medications for Tolerability questionnaire was used to determine patient preference between postoperative regimens and postoperative pain. Corneal endpoints included time to epithelialization, presence of corneal haze, sodium fluorescein staining, and modified Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) scores. Both corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty patients participated in the study. At month 3, 70% of patients preferred the dexamethasone insert, 20% preferred prednisolone acetate, and 10% expressed no preference. Patient surveys did not show a difference in postoperative pain between the study group and control group. No statistical difference was shown in time to epithelialization, 90-day CDVA or UDVA, postoperative corneal haze, corneal staining, or modified SPEED scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PRK, there was preference toward a dexamethasone insert in place of topical prednisolone acetate for the postoperative steroid treatment. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the two cohorts in regard to healing time or visual outcomes. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(9):590-594.].

Excimer laser programming of refractive astigmatism vs. anterior corneal astigmatism in the case of ocular residual astigmatism (ORA)

PURPOSE

To determine whether manifest refractive astigmatism (RA) or anterior corneal astigmatism (CA) is the best value for excimer laser programming in cases of ocular residual astigmatism (ORA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who had undergone LASIK surgery with a disagreement between manifest refractive and corneal cylinder (ocular residual astigmatism ORA)>0.75 D were included retrospectively in this study. We calculated target induced astigmatism vector (TIA), surgically induced astigmatism vector (SIA), difference vector between the astigmatism correction programmed in the excimer laser and refractive astigmatism (DVRA), difference vector between the astigmatism correction programmed in the excimer laser and corneal astigmatism (DVCA) and difference vector between TIA and SIA (DV), by the Alpins method. Vectorial differences between DV and DVRA, and between DV and DVCA, were then calculated to determine whether RA or CA was closest to the ideal cylinder for laser programming.

RESULTS

Of a total of 104 eyes undergoing LASIK, 22 eyes of 12 patients (21.1%) had an ORA>0.75 D and were included. Mean ORA was 0.9±0.2 D and mean postoperative subjective cylinder was 0.45 D. The DV-DVRA difference vector was 0.57±0.2 D, and the DV-DVCA difference vector was 0.86±0.4 D (P=0.02). RA was closer than CA to the ideal astigmatism correction.

CONCLUSION

In cases of discrepancy between manifest astigmatism and corneal astigmatism, correction of manifest refractive astigmatism seems to give a better refractive result.

Past and present of corneal refractive surgery: a retrospective study of long-term results after photorefractive keratectomy and a prospective study of refractive lenticule extraction

Surgical correction of refractive errors is becoming increasingly popular. In the 1990s, the excimer laser revolutionized the field of corneal refractive surgery with PRK and LASIK, and lately refractive lenticule extraction (ReLEx) of intracorneal tissue, using only a femtosecond laser, has become possible. Two new procedures were developed, ReLEx flex (FLEX) and ReLEx smile (SMILE). Until this thesis, only a few long-term studies of PRK with a relatively limited number of patients had been published; therefore, this thesis intended to retrospectively evaluate long-term outcomes after PRK for all degrees of myopia for a large number of patients. Furthermore, a prospective contralateral eye study comparing FLEX and SMILE, when treating high to moderate degrees of myopia, had not been performed prior to this study. This was the second aim of this thesis. In the first study, results from 160 PRK patients (289 eyes) were presented. Preoperative spherical equivalent ranged from -1.25 to -20.25 D, with 78% having low myopia (<-6 D). Average follow-up time was 16 years (range 13-19 years), making this the longest published follow-up study on PRK patients. Outcomes from eyes with low myopia were generally superior to outcomes from eyes with high myopia, at final follow-up. Seventy-two percent were within ± 1.00 D of target refraction, as compared to 47% of eyes with high myopia. However, results from a subgroup of unilateral treated PRK patients indicated that refraction at final follow-up was affected by myopic progression. Fifty percent of eyes with low myopia had uncorrected 20/20 distance visual acuity or better, as compared to 22% of eyes with high myopia. Haze did not occur if attempted corrections were <-4 D, and only eyes with high myopia lost two lines or more of CDVA (corrected distance visual acuity). Eighty-one per cent were satisfied or very satisfied with their surgery.

CONCLUSION

The results support the continued use of the excimer laser for corneal surface ablation as a treatment option for correction of low degrees of myopia, and as the treatment of choice for subgroups of refractive patients (thin corneas, etc.). The results also highlight that treatment of higher degrees of myopia with standard PRK should only be done today under special circumstances, due to low refractive predictability, and high risk of corneal haze. Technological advances since then should be taken into account when comparing these results with contemporary techniques. In the second study, 35 patients were randomized to receive FLEX in one eye and SMILE in the other. Preoperative spherical equivalent refraction ranged from -6 to -10 D with low degrees of astigmatism. A total of 34 patients completed the 6 month follow-up period. Refractive and visual outcomes were very similar for the two methods, as well as tear film measurements and changes in corneal biomechanics. Ninety-seven percent were within ± 1.00 D of target refraction, no eyes lost two lines or more of CDVA, and contrast sensitivity was unaffected after both procedures. The changes in higher-order aberrations were also very similar. There were also no differences in tear film parameters 6 months after surgery, although less postoperative foreign body sensation was reported within the first week after surgery in SMILE eyes. Corneal sublayer pachymetry measurements demonstrated equally increased epithelial thickness 6 months after surgery. Contrary to expectations, it was not possible to measure the theoretical biomechanical advantages of a small corneal incision in SMILE as compared to a corneal flap in FLEX. The main differences between FLEX and SMILE were found when the corneal nerves and intraoperative complications were evaluated. Thus, corneal sensitivity was better preserved and corneal nerve morphology was less affected after SMILE, but intraoperative complications occurred more frequently, although without visual sequela. Finally, 97% were satisfied or very satisfied with both their surgeries.

CONCLUSION

The results support the continued use of both FLEX and SMILE for treatment of up to high degrees of myopia. Overall, refractive and visual results for both procedures were good and similar, but from a biological point of view, the less invasive SMILE technique is more attractive, as demonstrated in this study, despite being slightly more surgically demanding than FLEX.