Astigmatism induced by conventional spherical ablation after PRK and LASIK in myopia with astigmatism < 1.00 D

Clinical outcomes of SMILE and WFG-LASIK used to treat myopia and astigmatism: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, efficacy and postoperative visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and Wavefront-Guided Laser in situ keratomileusis (WFG-LASIK) and to analyze their efficacy in correcting astigmatism.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. RevMan software version 5.3.0 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 976 eyes were included in 8 studies, of which 539 eyes underwent SMILE and 437 eyes underwent WFG-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better (P=0.18), the proportion of eyes within±0.50 diopter of target refraction postoperatively (P=0.10), or the postoperative magnitude of cylinder (P=0.10). Regarding the Alpins vector analysis of astigmatism, there was no statistically significant difference in the surgical magnitude of error (P=0.09) between the two groups. WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error (P= 0.002) and higher surgical correction index of cylinder (P=0.03) than SMILE. In terms of aberrations, higher order aberrations (P=0.46), spherical aberrations (P=0.22) and trefoil (P=0.56) were not statistically different, while WFG-LASIK induced less coma than SMILE surgery (P=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Both SMILE and WFG-LASIK are safe and effective ways to correct myopia and astigmatism. Compared with SMILE, WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error, higher surgical correction index of cylinder and induces less coma.

Long-Term Visual Quality and Pupil Changes after Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction for Eyes without Preoperative Cylinder Refraction

Purpose

To investigate the long-term changes in visual quality and pupil size after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for eyes without preoperative cylinder refraction.

Methods

Thirty-three myopic eyes (33 patients) without preoperative cylinder refraction were corrected using SMILE. Refractive outcomes, corneal curvature, aberrations, contrast sensitivity (CS), and pupil diameter were evaluated preoperatively, and 30 months postoperatively.

Results

The 30-month postoperative uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA, LogMAR) were -0.10 ± 0.09 and -0.14 ± 0.06, respectively, whereas the preoperative CDVA (LogMAR) was -0.07 ± 0.05. Cylinder refraction of -0.11 ± 0.21 D (ranging from -0.50 to 0.00) was observed at 30 months postoperatively, increasing from the preoperative cylinder refraction of 0.00 ± 0.00 D (P=0.004). Moreover, the centroid coordinates x, y of corneal anterior astigmatic vectors were -0.19 ± 0.22, 0.81 ± 0.33 at 30 months postoperatively, and 0.02 ± 0.28, 0.76 ± 0.51 preoperatively (Px < 0.001 and Py=0.810, respectively). Furthermore, a 15° axis change in the mean anterior corneal astigmatic vector was observed at 30 months postoperatively from the preoperative state, as measured by Pentacam. At 30 months postoperatively, the photopic Log CS reduced significantly with glare at three and six cycles/degrees (P < 0.001 and P=0.015, respectively), a decreased photopic pupil diameter (3.27 ± 0.55 mm vs. 3.10 ± 0.66 mm, P=0.030), and an increased Coma (Z31) and Trefoil (Z3-3) at 4 mm diameter area analysis. However, a significant linear regression relationship was only observed between changes in photopic pupil diameter and changes in photopic Log CS with glare at 12 cycles/degree (P=0.038 and β = 0.282).

Conclusion

Slight cylinder regression was observed with thicker corneal lenticular extraction after SMILE correction of nonastigmatic eyes 30 months postoperatively. This regression was mainly because of the axis changes in anterior corneal astigmatism power. Therefore, a cylinder nomogram modification of 0.25 to 0.50 D is considerable for correcting nonastigmatic myopic eyes with a predicted spherical lenticular thickness over 100 µm.

Astigmatism prediction in small-incision lenticule extraction

PURPOSE

To investigate whether postoperative-induced refractive astigmatism after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) could be predicted by preoperative objective astigmatism measured with autorefraction, keratometry, and Scheimpflug tomography.

SETTING

University eye clinic.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Only eyes without preoperative subjective astigmatism treated with SMILE for myopia were included. Postoperative subjective astigmatism was compared with preoperative objective astigmatism. Examinations were performed before SMILE and 3 months postoperatively and included subjective refraction, keratometry, autorefraction, and Scheimpflug tomographer measurements. Astigmatism was analyzed using double-angle plots and multivariate statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 358 eyes of 358 patients were included. The mean preoperative sphere was -7.33 diopter (D) ± 1.46 (SD). The postoperative spherical equivalent was -0.30 ± 0.49 D. Postoperatively, 79.6% and 98.9% of patients had a subjective cylinder ≤0.50 D and ≤1.00 D, respectively. Preoperative objective astigmatism measured with keratometry, autorefraction, and Scheimpflug tomography was significantly different (P < .05) from postoperative subjective refraction when all patients were analyzed; for patients with postoperative refractive astigmatism ≥0.50 D, preoperative astigmatism with keratometry and Scheimpflug tomography was not significantly different from postoperative refractive astigmatism. Preoperative objective astigmatism ≥0.50 D increased the risk ratio of postoperative subjective astigmatism ≥0.50 D by 2.2 (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative objective astigmatism could not be directly interchanged with postoperative subjective astigmatism, but the presence of preoperative astigmatism ≥0.50 D doubled the risk of inducing a postoperative subjective astigmatism ≥0.50 D. Extra care when performing subjective refraction should be taken in the presence of high objective astigmatism.

Wavefront-Guided LASIK Has Comparable Ocular and Corneal Aberrometric Outcomes but Better Visual Acuity Outcomes Than SMILE in Myopic Eyes

PURPOSE

To compare ocular and corneal aberrometric outcomes of wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

METHODS

This was a prospective, interventional study where 48 eyes (24 patients) underwent SMILE (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and 58 eyes (29 patients) underwent WFG LASIK (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL). Visual acuity and ocular surface disease index were assessed preoperatively and 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Corneal topography and anterior aberrations were assessed with the Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany) and iTrace (Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX), respectively. Ocular aberrations were also assessed with the iTrace.

RESULTS

Safety and efficacy indexes of WFG LASIK (0.99 and 1.01, respectively) and SMILE (1.01 and 1.13, respectively) were comparable, although WFG LASIK was better (P < .0001). At 3 months postoperatively, all eyes in both groups achieved an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better. Further, 74.14% and 45.83% of the eyes in the WFG LASIK and SMILE groups, respectively, achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/16 (P = .003). The Pentacam reported an increase in root mean square of higher order aberrations (diameter of 4 mm and 6th order Zernike) and coma with a decrease in spherical aberration in both groups (P < .001). Corneal aberrations from the iTrace also did not yield any definitive differences between the treatments. However, changes in ocular aberrations were clinically insignificant at 3 months after both treatments. The ocular surface disease index increased mildly after WFG LASIK (P > .05) but was unchanged after SMILE.

CONCLUSIONS

WFG LASIK and SMILE had similar aberrometric outcomes but WFG LASIK had better postoperative visual acuity. Surgeon experience, internal aberrations, small pupil size, and wound healing can enable similar outcomes in both procedures. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(8):527-532.].

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

Purpose

To compare two-year results of femtosecond laser assisted LASIK (femto-LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in terms of astigmatism correction in patients with less than 2.0 diopters (D) of spherical error and more than 2.0 D of cylinder error.

Methods

In this retrospective study, data were extracted from 100 patient charts. The two study groups were matched by age, gender, and baseline uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and refractive astigmatism (RA). Preoperative astigmatism was categorized as mild: 2.00 to <3.00 D, moderate: 3.00 to <4.00 D, and severe: ≥4.00 D.

Results

Mean RA in the femto-LASIK and PRK groups was respectively -3.15 ± 0.94 D (-7.00 to -2.00 D) and -3.29 ± 0.95 D (-6.25 to -2.00 D) at baseline (P = 0.284), and -0.61 ± 0.40 D and -0.62 ± 0.60 D one year after surgery (P = 0.674), but significantly lower in the femto-LASIK group (-0.61 ± 0.39 vs. -0.83 ± 0.56 D, P = 0.021) at 2 years when the rate of residual astigmatism more than 1.0 D was 6.3% in the femto-LASIK and 19.6% in the PRK group (P = 0.046). Mean UDVA in the femto-LASIK group (0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR) was better than the PRK group (0.06 ± 0.10 logMAR) (P = 0.025). Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was not significantly different between groups (0.01 ± 0.03 vs. 0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR, P = 0.714). Both groups had 1-4 Snellen lines CDVA improvement. The three subgroups of baseline astigmatism did not differ significantly in terms of residual astigmatism (all P > 0.05). However, in subgroups with ≥4.00 D cylinder, there was less astigmatic regression at 1 year in the femto-LASIK group (0.28 ± 0.43 D) than the PRK group (0.54 ± 0.68 D) (P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Our results pointed to better two-year results with femto-LASIK in the treatment of different degrees of astigmatism. UDVA improvement was superior with femto-LASIK, but the two methods did not significantly differ in terms of CDVA improvement.

Vector analysis of 1-year astigmatic outcomes from a prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK in myopes

PURPOSE

To compare the astigmatic outcomes of LASIK with a single excimer laser platform using either wavefront-guided (WFG) or wavefront-optimized (WFO) modes.

METHODS

Sixty-eight eyes of 34 patients underwent LASIK for myopia with the Wavelight Allegretto Eye-Q 400-Hz laser platform (Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Hüenberg, Switzerland). One eye underwent WFG-LASIK and the contralateral eye underwent WFO-LASIK. Alpins vector analysis of astigmatism was performed using manifest refraction measured preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively and vertexed to the corneal plane. Eyes were stratified for subgroup analysis based on preoperative manifest astigmatism.

RESULTS

WFG-LASIK and WFO-LASIK were similar with regard to surgically induced astigmatism, difference vector, magnitude of error, correction index, flattening index, and index of success. The angle of error was 80% less in the WFG group compared to the WFO group (1.92° ± 0.67º vs 9.66° ± 3.7º, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

WFG-LASIK and WFO-LASIK using the Alcon WaveLight Allegretto Eye-Q 400-Hz excimer laser platform produce similar astigmatic results in myopic patients; however, the WFG mode may produce slightly more predictable astigmatic corrections.