Two-year results of femtosecond assisted LASIK versus PRK for different severity of astigmatism

Vector analysis of astigmatism correction after PRK, FS-LASIK, and SMILE for myopic astigmatism

PURPOSE

To compare astigmatic correction among photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 157 eyes that underwent three procedures (59 PRK, 47 FS-LASIK, and 51 SMILE) for the treatment of myopia with low to high astigmatism (- 0.25 to - 4.50 D). Ocular residual astigmatism (ORA) was calculated by vector analysis using refractive (RA) and corneal astigmatism. Vector analysis results were compared in different procedures in the two RA groups (low ≤ 1.00 D and high > 1.00 D) at 3 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in postoperative safety and efficacy outcomes (all P > 0.05). No significant differences were found in postoperative cylinders between all surgical groups (all p > 0.05), except for 3 months postoperative ORA in FS-LASIK (P = 0.004). At 12 months, 77%, 59.2%, and 50% of eyes attain emmetropia in the FS-LASIK, SMILE, and PRK groups, respectively. Vector analysis showed comparable values for surgical induced astigmatism, target induced astigmatism, mean error, and angle of error between groups at 12 months. Significant differences were observed only in the correction index and difference vector parameters in the astigmatic > 1.00 D group at 3 months (P < 0.001), and FS-LASIK was preferable.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year outcomes revealed that PRK, FS-LASIK, and SMILE were all equally effective in correcting myopic astigmatism. However, FS-LASIK demonstrated more favorable astigmatism correction in eyes with astigmatism > 1.00D in early postoperatively.

Refractive Surgery for Older Children and Adults with Accommodative Esotropia: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Accommodative esotropia (AET) is characterized by an esodeviation of the eyes due to uncorrected hyperopia, deficient fusional divergence, or high accommodative convergence. Decreasing hyperopia would reduce accommodative convergence and strabismus. We sought to review the existing evidence regarding the outcomes of refractive surgery in patients with AET.

METHODS

A four-database search (Pubmed, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus) was performed from inception to March 2021 using the following MeSH terms: ("Refractive Surgical Procedures" OR "Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ" OR "Photorefractive Keratectomy" OR "Lens Implantation, Intraocular") AND ("Esotropia" OR "Accommodative Esotropia" OR "Refractive Esotropia" OR "Accommodative Strabismus"). No meta-analysis was performed due to studies' heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies including 22 case series enrolling 378 patients and 6 case reports enrolling 8 patients were selected among 185 original abstracts. In the case series, a total of 378 patients (726 eyes) were recruited with an age range of 8-52 years. All studies reported mean follow-up periods of at least 12 months. Photorefractive keratectomy was performed in 7 studies, laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis in 9 studies, laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy was reported in 1 study, and 3 studies implanted intraocular lenses, including iris-fixated and collamer. Considering the adult patients with a preoperative corrected esodeviation ≤10 prism diopters (PD) (n = 129), all but 5 (3.9%) presented orthophoria or ≤10PD after refractive surgery. All children but 4 (4.5%) ended up with an esodeviation ≤10PD after surgery with those exceptions being in the range of 11-15PD. Six case reports were included in this review, comprising a total of 8 patients (16 eyes) with an age range of 7-34 years and a follow-up range of 4-48 months. Six case reports were included in this review, comprising a total of 8 patients (16 eyes) with an age range of 7-34 years and a follow-up range of 4-48 months.

CONCLUSION

Evidence produced so far points out that refractive surgery may be an alternative for spectacle correction for adults with AET ≤10PD. There is not enough evidence to recommend its use for patients under 18 years of age. The safety and predictability of these procedures for this purpose remains unclear as the selection criteria used for these patients are much different than the usual indications and there are no studies with long-term follow-up.

Refractive outcomes of high-magnitude astigmatism correction using femtosecond LASIK versus transepithelial PRK

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of femtosecond laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) with transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (T-PRK) for the correction of high-grade astigmatism.

METHODS

Medical records of patients with astigmatism of 2 diopters (D) or higher, who were treated with FS-LASIK or T-PRK in 2013 through 2014 at a private practice laser clinic, were retrospectively analyzed. Efficacy, safety, predictability and vector analysis of astigmatism correction were compared between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

The study included 93 eyes treated with FS-LASIK and 186 eyes treated with T-PRK. No significant differences in postoperative spherical equivalent (-0.10 ± 0.7 D and -0.11 ± 0.7 D, respectively, p = 0.958) and postoperative refractive astigmatism (0.79 ± 0.54 D and 0.82 ± 0.63 D, respectively, p = 0.685) were demonstrated. A significant advantage of FS-LASIK over T-PRK was seen for the efficacy (1.00 ± 0.18 and 0.86 ± 0.22, respectively, p < 0.001) and safety (1.03 ± 0.17 and 0.89 ± 0.21, respectively, p < 0.001) indices. Results remain statistically significant in a multivariate analysis model. Vector analysis for the astigmatism correction showed no significant difference between the surgery methods in the surgically induced astigmatism, difference vector, correction index and index of success.

CONCLUSION

Both procedures demonstrated desirable post-operative SE outcomes for high-grade astigmatism correction. However, FS-LASIK achieved better results than T-PRK in the efficacy and safety parameters.