Long term results of Epi-LASIK and LASEK for myopia

Comparative study of wave-front aberration and corneal Asphericity after SMILE and LASEK for myopia: a short and long term study

Background

The study compares the wave-front aberration and corneal asphericity from multiple perspectives after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction and Laser-assisted Subepithelial Keratomileusis for mild to moderate myopia in a short and long time period.

Methods

This prospective and comparative study included 32 eyes in the SMILE group, with a mean spherical equivalent (SE) of − 4.1 ± 0.9D and 32 eyes in the LASEK group, with a mean SE of − 3.7 ± 1.0D. Visual acuity, refractive error, wave-front aberration, corneal Q value and corneal refractive power were analyzed pre-, 3 months and 3 years post-operatively.

Results

There was no significant difference in refractive error, wave-front aberration, corneal Q value and corneal refractive power before treatment. Three months postoperative, Q value within 6 mm (SMILE: 0.46 ± 0.27, LASEK: 0.63 ± 0.28, p = 0.02), the relative peripheral corneal power (5-8 mm: p < 0.05), change of higher order aberration (SMILE: 0.10 ± 0.16, LASEK: 0.24 ± 0.20, p = 0.004) and spherical aberration (SA, SMILE: -0.07 ± 0.30, LASEK: -0.41 ± 0.40, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the SMILE than in LASEK group. The visual acuity, refractive error, coma, peripheral Q value, central corneal power had no significant difference between the two groups. Three years post-operation, the corneal power distribution results and SA were similar to that of 3-month, while the Q value had no significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusion

In the early stage after SMILE, the HOAs was lower, the corneal refractive power from central to periphery was more uniform than after LASEK; and in the long-term run, SMILE still preceded LASEK in the corneal asphericity and aberration.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12886-019-1084-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Predictability and stability of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy with mitomycin C for the correction of high myopia

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the predictability and stability of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) with mitomycin C (MMC) in correction of high myopia (≤-6.0 diopters [D]) as compared to low-to-moderate myopia (>-6.0 D).This is a retrospective, comparative, cohort study which included 43 eyes of 43 consecutive patients who underwent LASEK with MMC in a private hospital in Hong Kong by a single surgeon. Twenty-five eyes had high myopia (mean spherical equivalent [SE] = -8.53 ± 1.82 D) and 18 eyes had low-to-moderate myopia (mean SE = -3.99 ± 1.37 D) before surgery.In terms of refractive predictability, mean SE was significantly better in eyes with preoperative low-to-moderate myopia than high myopia at 6 months (0.04 ± 0.23 vs 0.31 ± 0.52 D, P = .035). In terms of refractive stability, between 1 and 3 months, both groups had mean absolute change of SE of around 0.25 D. Between 3 and 6 months, preoperative low-to-moderate myopia group had significantly less absolute change of SE compared to high myopia group (0.07 vs 0.23 D, P = .003). More eyes with preoperative high myopia changed SE by more than 0.25 D than those with low-to-moderate myopia between 3 and 6 months (32.0% vs 5.6%, P = .057).In conclusion, LASEK with MMC is more unpredictable and unstable in correction of high myopia than low-to-moderate myopia. The refractive outcome of most low-to-moderate myopia correction stabilizes at 3 months. Stability is not achieved until after 6 months in high myopia correction.

Comparation of effectiveness of silicone hydrogel contact lens and hydrogel contact lens in patients after LASEK

AIM

To conduct a comparative study of effectiveness of silicone hydrogel contact lens and hydrogel contact lens, which are used in patients after laser-assisted subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK).

METHODS

Sixty-three patients (121 eyes) with a spherical equivalent ≤-5.0 D were chosen after undergoing LASEK in 2012 at Guangdong General Hospital. They were randomly divided into 2 groups. The silicone hydrogel group included 32 cases (61 eyes) that wore silicone hydrogel contact lenses for 4-6d after the operation, while the hydrogel group included 31 cases (60 eyes) who wore hydrogel contact lenses for 4-6d after the operation. Patients' self-reported postoperative symptoms (including pain, photophobia, tears, and foreign body sensation) were evaluated. The healing time of the corneal epithelium, the visual acuity of patients without contact lens after epithelial healing, and the incidence of delayed corneal epithelial shedding were also assessed. The follow-up time was 1mo.

RESULTS

Postoperative symptoms were milder in the silicone hydrogel group than in the hydrogel group. There were significant differences in pain, foreign body sensation, and photophobia between the 2 groups (P<0.05), although there was no significant difference in postoperative tearing (P>0.05). The healing time of the corneal epithelium in the silicone hydrogel lens group was markedly shorter than that in the hydrogel group (4.07±0.25 vs 4.33±0.82d, t=2.43, P=0.02). Visual acuity without contact lenses after healing of the corneal epithelium was better in the silicone hydrogel group compared with the hydrogel group (χ (2)=7.76, P=0.02). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of delayed corneal epithelial shedding between the 2 groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LASEK using silicon hydrogel contact lenses had less discomfort and shorter corneal epithelial healing time compared with those using hydrogel contact lenses, suggesting that silicon hydrogel contact lenses may be considered to be a better choice of bandage contact lens after LASEK.

Long term results of no-alcohol laser epithelial keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for myopia

AIM

To evaluate the long term clinical results of mechanical no-alcohol-assisted laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) versus standard photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for low-moderate myopia.

METHODS

Twenty-five eyes treated with LASEK and twenty-five eyes treated with PRK were evaluated with a mean follow-up duration of 60mo. Mechanical separation of the epithelium was performed with blunt spatula and without application of alcohol. Laser ablation was performed with the MEL-70 excimer laser. All patients were examined daily until epithelial closure; at 1, 3, 6, and 12mo, and every year subsequently. Main outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction, haze, efficacy and safety indexes.

RESULTS

Twenty-one eyes and 22 eyes completed follow-up of 60mo in LASEK and PRK group respectively. Manifest refraction at 60mo follow-up was -0.01 and 0.26 in LASEK and PRK group respectively. In the LASEK group mean UDVA and mean CDVA after 60mo were 20/22 and 20/20 respectively (P>0.01). In the PRK group mean UDVA and mean CDVA at 60mo follow-up were 20/20 and 20/20 after 60mo (P>0.01). The efficacy indexes were 0.87 and 0.95, and the safety indexes were 1.25 and 1.4 respectively for LASEK group and PRK group.

CONCLUSION

Both standard PRK and no-alcohol LASEK offer safe and effective correction of low-moderate myopia in the long term without any statistically significant difference between the two groups.

Four-year to seven-year outcomes of advanced surface ablation with excimer laser for high myopia

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate and compare outcomes after photorefractive keratectomy with cooling (cPRK) and laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) for high myopia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-masked follow-up study of patients treated for myopia between 2007 and 2009 with cPRK or LASEK, using a high-frequency flying-spot excimer laser with eye-tracker (MEL80; Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany). One eye of each patient was randomly chosen for analysis. Re-treated eyes were excluded.

RESULTS

Forty-six cPRK patients and 35 LASEK patients were included. Spherical equivalent averaged -7.69 ± 1.47 diopters (D) in cPRK eyes and -7.98 ± 2.06 D in LASEK eyes (p = 0.31) before surgery. The average follow-up time was 4.6 years in cPRK patients and 6.0 years in LASEK patients (p < 0.05). At final follow-up, no cPRK eyes and one LASEK eye (p = 0.46) had lost two lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). No eyes had significant haze at final follow-up, although trace haze was found in four cPRK eyes and six LASEK eyes (p = 0.44). However, at 6 weeks after surgery, zero cPRK eyes and nine LASEK eyes (p < 0.05) had significant haze. At final follow-up, 63 % of cPRK eyes and 35 % of LASEK eyes (p = 0.17) were within ±1.0 D of intended refraction. Finally, 100 % of cPRK patients and 92 % of LASEK patients (p = 0.87) were satisfied or very satisfied with the surgery at final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

cPRK and LASEK seemed safe and with high patient satisfaction 4 to 7 years after surgery for high myopia. However, cPRK was more effective than LASEK in reducing initial significant corneal haze.