Photorefractive keratectomy for astigmatism greater than -2.00 diopters in eyes with low, high, or extreme myopia

Comparison of the accuracy of six intraocular lens power calculation formulas for eyes of axial length exceeding 25.0mm

PURPOSE

To compare intraocular lens power calculation formulas for eyes longer than 25.0mm in terms of absolute error and the percentages of postoperative emmetropia and hyperopia.

METHODS

The data for myopic patients who underwent uneventful phacoemulsification between October 2015 and June 2019 were reviewed. Intraocular lens power was calculated using Holladay 1, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 2, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II formulas. The power of the lens implanted was based on Holladay 2. Three months after phacoemulsification, the refraction was measured, and the mean absolute error was calculated. The percentage of patients with good uncorrected visual acuity and percentage of hyperopic patients for each formula was established. ROC curves with a cut-off point of axial length were drawn for each formula and the area under the curve was evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (81 eyes) whose ocular axial length ranged between 25.01mm and 28.57mm were included. The Barrett Universal II formula achieved the lowest mean absolute error of 0.08±0.08D. Additionally, with the Barrett Universal II, the percentage of patients with good uncorrected visual acuity (81.5%) was the highest, and the percentage of hyperopic patients (4.9%) was the lowest. The Barrett Universal II and Holladay 1 formulas had the largest area under curve (0.764 and 0.718, respectively).

CONCLUSION

1. The Barrett Universal II formula is recommended for intraocular lens power calculation for eyes with axial length greater than 25.0mm. 2. Considering the ROC curve method, the Barrett Universal II and Holladay 1 formulas appear to be the most appropriate.

Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Formulas Involving 148 Eyes with Long Axial Lengths: A Retrospective Chart-Review Study

Purpose. This study aims to compare the accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas in eyes with long axial lengths from Chinese patients subjected to cataract surgery. Methods. A total of 148 eyes with an axial length of >26 mm from 148 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation were included. The Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas were used to calculate the refractive power of the intraocular lenses and the postoperative estimated power. Results. Overall, the Haigis formula achieved the lowest level of median absolute error 1.025 D (P < 0.01 for Haigis versus each of the other formulas), followed by SRK/T formula (1.040 D). All formulas were least accurate when eyes were with axial length of >33 mm, and median absolute errors were significantly higher for those eyes than eyes with axial length = 26.01-30.00 mm. Absolute error was correlated with axial length for the SRK/T (r = 0.212, P = 0.010) and Hoffer Q (r = 0.223, P = 0.007) formulas. For axial lengths > 33 mm, eyes exhibited a postoperative hyperopic refractive error. Conclusions. The Haigis and SRK/T formulas may be more suitable for calculating intraocular lens power for eyes with axial lengths ranging from 26 to 33 mm. And for axial length over 33 mm, the Haigis formula could be more accurate.

Analysis of the efficacy, predictability, and safety of LASEK for myopia and myopic astigmatism using the Technolas 217 excimer laser

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, predictability, and safety of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism.

SETTING

Stanford University Eye Laser Center, Stanford, California, USA.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis comprised 102 eyes that had LASEK for myopia using the Bausch & Lomb Technolas 217 excimer laser. Primary outcome variables including uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle- corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), manifest refraction, and complications were evaluated at 3, 6, and 12 months. Vector analysis was performed on eyes that received astigmatic correction.

RESULTS

The mean spherical equivalent was -7.03 diopters (D) +/- 2.61 (SD) preoperatively, +0.19 +/- 0.64 D at 3 months, +0.23 +/- 0.82 D at 6 months, and +0.03 +/- 0.63 D at 12 months (P<.001). At 3, 6, and 12 months, the UCVA was 20/20 or better in 66%, 67%, and 83% of eyes, respectively, and 20/40 or better in 98%, 99%, and 100%; 74%, 70%, and 83%, respectively, were within +/-0.5 D of emmetropia, and 89%, 86%, and 97%, respectively, were within +/-1.0 D. No eye lost more than 2 lines of BSCVA. At 3, 6, and 12 months, 10.0%, 8.7%, and 0% of eyes, respectively, had trace corneal haze. Vector analysis found a success rate of approximately 78% to 80% in achieving the astigmatic surgical correction at the 3 postoperative visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy was an effective, predictable, and safe procedure for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Further studies are needed to determine the role of LASEK in the refractive surgery spectrum.

Corneal astigmatic change after photorefractive keratectomy and photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the efficacy, safety, predictability, and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 70 eyes were treated for myopia and 70 eyes were treated for myopic astigmatism. Refraction, corneal topography, slitlamp findings, and visual acuity in the 2 groups at 1, 3, and 6 months were evaluated and compared. Vector analysis was performed to determine the SIA in both groups.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative spherical equivalent at the glasses plane in the PRK and PARK groups was -6.06 diopters (D) and -7.18 D, respectively. At 6 months, the mean reduction in astigmatism in the PARK group was 61.0%. Predictability was within +/-1.0 D in 85.2% of eyes in the PRK group and 62.5% in the PARK group. An uncorrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better was achieved in 91.8% and 83.9% of eyes, respectively. The mean SIA was 0.64 D in the PRK group, with a general with-the-rule axis shift. The results of vector analysis were more favorable when calculated from refractive values than from Sim-K corneal topography values. The mean astigmatism correction index and index of success calculated from refractive data were 0.75 and 0.38 in the PARK group. The mean magnitude and angle of error were 0.22 +/- 0.52 D and -2.13 +/- 24.41 degrees, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Photorefractive keratectomy and PARK were effective and safe procedures for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. However, SIA occurred with spherical myopic treatments. This small SIA may be a confounding factor in low astigmatic treatments.

Laser in situ keratomileusis for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, predictability, and surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised 69 eyes that had LASIK to correct myopia and 74 eyes that had LASIK to correct myopic astigmatism. The excimer laser keratectomy was performed using a Summit Apex Plus machine. Refraction, visual acuity, and computerized corneal videokeratography data from the preoperative and postoperative examinations were collected. The astigmatic change was calculated by the Alpins vector analysis method.

RESULTS

The preoperative spherical equivalent at the glasses plane in the myopia and myopic astigmatism groups was -8.08 diopters (D) and -9.73 D, respectively. At 6 months, the spherical equivalent and residual corneal astigmatism were -0.25 D and 0.85 D, respectively, in the myopia group and -0.71 D and 0.82 D, respectively, in the myopic astigmatism group. In the myopia group, 88% of eyes were within +/-1.0 D of the intended myopia correction and in the myopic astigmatism group, 85% were within +/-1.0 D of the targeted spherical equivalent and 90% were within +/-1.0 D of the intended astigmatism correction. The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 94.1% of eyes in the myopia group and 92.5% of eyes in the myopic astigmatism group. The SIA magnitude was 0.66 D with the axis randomly distributed in the myopia group. The mean astigmatism correction index was 0.97, the mean magnitude of error was 0.13 D +/- 0.62 (SD), and the mean angle of error was -3.70 +/- 13.73 degrees in the myopic astigmatism group.

CONCLUSION

Laser in situ keratomileusis had similar predictability, safety, and efficacy in the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. The astigmatism correction was effective, but the results suggest that subjective astigmatism of less than 1.0 D need not be treated with the Summit Apex Plus laser.

Photorefractive Keratectomy for Astigmatism With the Meditec MEL 60 Laser

PURPOSE

To evaluate the results of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in eyes treated with astigmatic refractive errors.

METHODS

Nine hundred forty eyes were treated with the Aesculap Meditec MEL 60 ArF excimer laser. Treatment groups were: Group 1 (n=746) eyes with compound myopic astigmatism, Group 2 (n=104) eyes with compound hyperopic astigmatism, Group 3 (n=75) eyes treated for mixed astigmatism, and Group 4 (n=15) eyes with simple myopic astigmatism (negative cylinder).

RESULTS

In Group 1, the preoperative spherical equivalent refraction of -6.10 D with an average of -1.50 D cylinder decreased to -0.95 D with -0.13 D cylinder; uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/40 or better was achieved in 86% (642/746 eyes); 20/20 or better in 58% (433/746 eyes); 0.8% (6/746 eyes) lost two lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity (SCVA); 74% (552/746 eyes) were within +/-0.50 D and 93% (694/746 eyes) were within +/-1.00 D of target refraction. In Group 2, preoperative mean +4.57 D spherical equivalent refraction with an average of +1.57 D cylinder decreased to +1.13 D with +0.38 D cylinder; UCVA of 20/40 or better was achieved in 84% (87/104 eyes); 20/20 or better in 46% (48/104 eyes); 14,4% (15/104 eyes) lost two or more lines of SCVA; 52% (54/104 eyes) were within +/-0.50 D and 82% (85/104 eyes) were within +/-1.00 D of target refraction. In Group 3, mean preoperative -4.20 D cylinder and +3.00 D spherical equivalent refraction decreased to -0.50 D cylinder and -0.50 D spherical equivalent refraction; UCVA of 20/40 or better was achieved in 83% (62/75 eyes); 20/20 or better in 32% (24/75 eyes); 13.3% (10/75 eyes) lost two or more lines of SCVA. In Group 4, mean preoperative -3.98 D cylinder decreased to -0.62 D cylinder; UCVA of 20/40 or better was achieved in 60% (9/15 eyes); none of the eyes achieved 20/20 or better; SCVA remained stable in 6.6% (1/15 eyes) and decreased two or more lines in 20.0% (3/15 eyes); 20% (3/15 eyes) were within +/-0.50 D and 53.3% (8/15 eyes) were within +/-1.00 D of target refraction.

CONCLUSION

PRK with the Meditec MEL 60 laser produced the best results in eyes with compound myopic astigmatism (Group 1). In all other groups, results were less predictable.

Laser in situ Keratomileusis for Correction of High Astigmatism After Penetrating Keratoplasty

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for correction of high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty, and to assess the refractive results and predictability of the procedure.

METHODS

LASIK was performed on 19 patients (19 eyes) with high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty, using the Chiron Automated Corneal Shaper and the Chiron-Technolas Keracor 116 excimer laser. The amount of preoperative refractive astigmatism ranged from 6.50 to 14.50 D (mean, 9.21 +/- 1.95 D) and the spherical component of manifest refraction ranged from -7.00 to +1.25 D (mean, -2.14 +/- 2.11 D). All patients completed a minimum follow-up of 12 months.

RESULTS

Refraction was stable after 3 months. At 1 year after LASIK, the amount of refractive astigmatism was reduced to a mean of 1.09 +/- 0.33 D (range, 0.50 to 1.75 D), with 57.9% of the eyes within +/- 1.00 D of refractive astigmatism. The mean percent reduction of astigmatism was 87.9 +/- 3.7%. The postoperative spherical component of manifest refraction ranged from -1.00 to +1.75 D with a mean of +0.43 +/- 0.82 D. Vector analysis showed that the mean amount of axis deviation was 1.1 +/- 1.3 degrees and the mean percent correction of preoperative astigmatism was 92.6 +/- 8.4%. There were no intraoperative complications. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not reduced in any eye, and improved by 2 or more lines in 42.1% of eyes after LASIK.

CONCLUSION

LASIK with the Chiron-Technolas Keracor 116 excimer laser was effective for correction of both astigmatism and myopia after penetrating keratoplasty. The procedure proved to be safe and gave fairly predictable and stable refractive results.

Photoastigmatic Refractive Keratectomy or Laser in situ Keratomileusis for Moderate and High Myopic Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK) to treat moderate and higher myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

A retrospective nonrandomized study of 78 eyes with myopic astigmatism (range, 2.00 to 6.00 D) was undertaken. Thirty-eight eyes were treated with LASDK and 40 eyes were treated with PARK. Groups were similar in terms of baseline sphere and refraction. Photoablation for both LASDX and PARK was performed by single pass for correction of -6.00 D or less spherical equivalent refraction or multi-pass, multi-zone at 4, 5, and 6 mm for corrections greater than -6.00 D. Astigmatism was corrected using a single-pass ablation at 6.0 mm diameter. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, corneal topography, and patient satisfaction were measured preoperatively and postoperatively.

RESULTS

Six months postoperatively, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 100% of LASEK eyes and 90.0% of PARK eyes; 20/25 in 86.84% LASEK eyes and 47.5% of PARK eyes; 20/20 in 65.75% of LASEK eyes and 15% of PARK eyes. Postoperative residual cylinder was -0.54 ± 0.32 D in LASEK eyes and -1.28 ± 0.80 D in PARK eyes. Postoperative residual cylinder axis remained stable (within 15° at 1 month postoperatively) in 61.1% of LASEK eyes and 40% of PARK eyes. In 5.3% of the LASEK eyes, corneal haze developed; 95.5% of PARK eyes developed corneal haze. One LASIK eye lost best spectacle-corrected visual acuity and 3 eyes (7.89%) had a cap complication. Three eyes (7.5%) lost 2 lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity due to severe corneal haze. Among LASEK patients, 92.1% were highly satisfied and 62.5% of PARK patients were highly satisfied.

CONCLUSION

For myopic astigmatism between 2.00 and 6.00 D, LASEK provided better accuracy, fewer complications, and higher patient satisfaction than PARK. PARK may achieve an incomplete cylindrical correction and may have a higher associated rist of loss of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. [J Refract Surg 2000;16(suppl):S268-S271).

Laser in situ Keratomileusis for Ametropia After Penetrating Keratoplasty

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of excimer laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in the treatment of refractive errors after penetrating keratoplasty.

METHODS

Eight eyes underwent LASIK after a mean 71 months (SD 60) following the initial penetrating keratoplasty. A full ophthalmic assessment was performed before LASIK and at 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Mean follow-up was 8.6 months (SD 3.2).

RESULTS

No eyes lost any Snellen lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity at the latest follow-up. Mean reduction in spherical equivalent refraction was 91% from -6.79 D (SD 4.17) to -0.64 D (SD 1.92) and mean reduction of cylinder was 72% from -6.79 D (SD 3.28) to -1.93 D (SD 1.17) at 6 months. Mean surgically induced astigmatism was 5.50 D (SD 2.42) and the index of surgically induced astigmatism divided by the initial cylinder expressed as a percentage was 81%. Mean outcome indices were: correction index 0.87, index of success 0.31, and angle of error 0.95 degrees. Three eyes (43%) achieved a spherical equivalent refraction of +/-0.50 D and 4 eyes (57%) achieved a spherical equivalent refraction of +/-1.00 D of emmetropia.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of LASIK after penetrating keratoplasty was good compared to incisional or surface based excimer laser methods and has the advantage of reducing the myopic spherical equivalent refraction in addition to astigmatism, thus improving the uncorrected visual acuities.

Comprehensive method of analyzing the results of photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy for the treatment of post-cataract myopic anisometropia

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy, stability, and safety of photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy (PARK) in treating post-cataract myopic anisometropia to restore binocularity and to describe a comprehensive method for analyzing the results of refractive surgery.

SETTING

St. Paul's Eye Center, Royal Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

METHODS

Nineteen patients (20 eyes) with post-cataract myopic anisometropia were treated with PARK using a VISX Twenty-Twenty laser and followed for 12 months. Cataract surgery had been performed between 10 and 144 months (mean 43.4 months) previously. A comprehensive method based on Long's matrix formalism and the vech operator of Harris, in addition to the nearest equivalent sphere and cylinder, was used to analyze the refractive data.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative refraction in the post-cataract eyes was -4.79 +1.17 x 0.2 and in the fellow eyes, +0.02 +0.31 x 166. Twelve months after PARK, the postoperative refraction in the post-cataract eyes was -0.90 +0.65 x 2, a significant reduction (P = .15). This postoperative refraction was not significantly different from that in the fellow eye (P = .93). The pretreatment mean uncorrected visual acuity was 0.12. It improved to 0.41 at 12 months, at which time 52% of eyes achieved a visual acuity of 0.5 or better without correction. All patients regained binocularity. At 12 months, 2 eyes (11%) showed clinically unacceptable regression; 1 eye with grade 2 haze lost 1 line of corrected visual acuity.

CONCLUSIONS

Photoastigmatic refractive keratectomy reduced post-cataract myopic anisometropia, allowing restoration of binocularity in all patients. Overall, the results in this elderly population with previous ocular surgery, posterior capsule thickening, and macular degeneration are not as satisfactory as those obtained from similar treatment of physiological myopia. Stability and postoperative complications are acceptable.