Three-Year Follow-Up of Laser In Situ Keratomileusis Treatments for Myopia: Multi-Center Cohort Study in Korean Population

Posterior chamber toric implantable collamer lenses vs LASIK for myopia and astigmatism: systematic review

This systematic review compares the visual and refractive outcome of laser in situ keratomileusis with (toric) implantable collamer lens (ICL) in the treatment of myopic astigmatism. An electronic literature search led to 19 comparative articles. Refractive outcome, efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability as well as differences in contrast sensitivity and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were analyzed for moderate (-3 to -6 diopters [D]) and high (≥-6 D) myopia. Results were either significantly in favor of (toric)-ICL or equal. Fewer HOAs and better contrast sensitivity after (toric)-ICL seem to be the largest asset in its refractive and clinical superiority. However, longer follow-up studies are indicated, specifically for systematically comparing long-term adverse effects.

Reversal of Myopic Correction for Patients Intolerant to LASIK

Purpose

To evaluate the outcome of the reversal of myopia correction in patients intolerant to LASIK.

Methods

This study is a retrospective and case series of patients who decided to reverse their previous myopic LASIK correction between July 2012 and July 2020. It was conducted at a private refractive surgery centre, Ismailia, Egypt. The patients were followed up after reversal treatment for one year. Primary LASIK and reversal treatment were performed by a 500 kHz Amaris excimer laser platform. The main outcomes included refractive predictability, stability, efficacy, and safety and any reported complications.

Results

This study included 48 eyes of 24 patients (6 male and 18 female patients). The average duration between the primary LASIK surgery and reversal treatment was 3.20 ± 0.30 months (range 3 to 4 months). Reversal treatment was bilateral in all patients. The mean age of the patients was 38 ± 1.9 years (range 37 to 45 yrs). After reversal, the mean postreversal cycloplegic refraction spherical equivalent was −1.82 ± 0.34 D (range −1.50 to −3.00 D). The mean ablation depth was 34.10 ± 7.36 μm (range 20 to 46 μm), and the mean of the central corneal thickness 12 months after reversal treatment was 510.2 ± 14.4 μm (range 515 to 487 μm). The mean keratometric reading was 42.6 ± 1.6 (range 42.5 to 44.8). The mean of CDVA was 0.2 ± 0.03 log MAR (range −0.10 to 0.4 log MAR). The mean optical zone of reversal treatment was 6.1 ± 0.3 mm (range 5.9 to 6.2 mm). UDVA was 0.4 log MAR in 87.5% of the patients, 0.5 log MAR in 8.3% of the patients, and 0.6 log MAR in 4.2% of the patients. CDVA remained unchanged in 83.3% of patients; 2.1% of the patients gained one line of CDVA (Snellen); 8.3% of the patients lost one line of CDVA; 6.3% of the patients lost two lines of CDVA. No cases of corneal ectasia were recorded. The only postoperative complications were flap microfolds in 3 eyes (6.25%).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study demonstrates that reversal of myopic LASIK treatment is a safe, stable, and effective option for intolerant patients.