A Novel Laser Refractive Surgical Treatment for Presbyopia: Optics-Based Customization for Improved Clinical Outcome

Efficacy, Safety, Predictability, and Stability of LASIK for Presbyopia Correction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in the treatment of presbyopia.

METHODS

The databases of CNKI, VIP, Wan-Fang, CBM, Chinese Clinical Registry, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched until March 2023. The authors chose the studies of LASIK in the treatment of presbyopia. Outcomes were efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability. The review was registered in the international platform of registered systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (INPLASY202350005).

RESULTS

A total of 28 non-randomized controlled trials (15,861 eyes) were included. The results showed that after LASIK, (1) the distance efficacy decreased (mean difference [MD]: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.0 to 0.03, P < .05) and the near efficacy increased (MD: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.19 to-0.02, P < .05); (2) the distance safety decreased (MD: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.10, P < .0001) and near safety increased (MD: -0.19, 95% CI: -0.39 to 0.02, P > .05); (3) the predictability within ±1.00 and ±0.50 D was 94% (relative risk [RR]: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.90 to 0.98, P < .001) and 80% (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.86, P < .001), respectively; and (4) 6 months postoperatively, the percentage of spherical equivalent changing within ±0.50 D was 95% (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.99, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The near efficacy, predictability, and stability of LASIK for presbyopia correction were satisfactory; however, the distance efficacy and distance safety decreased. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(9):627-638.].

Clinical outcomes of presbyopia correction with the latest techniques of presbyLASIK: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to collect the scientific literature on the correction of presbyopia with laser in situ keratomileusis (presbyLASIK) in last years and to analyse the quality of such scientific evidence using a validated methodology for conducting a systematic review. A total of 42 articles were initially identified, but after applying the selection criteria and an additional manual search a total of 23 articles were finally included: 2 non-randomized controlled clinical trials (NRCT) and 21 case series. Quality assessment of NRCTs and case series was performed with the ROBINS-I and the 20-criterion quality appraisal checklist defined by Moga et al. (IHE Publ 2012), respectively. For NRCT, the risk of bias was moderate in one study and serious in the other NRCT, being the main sources of risk, the domains related to confounding, selection of participants and measurement of outcomes. For case series studies, the main source of risk of bias was subjects not entering the study at the same point of the conditions (different levels of presbyopia). Likewise, a significant level of uncertainty was detected for the following items: consecutive recruitment of patients, blinding of outcome assessors to the intervention that the patient received, and conclusions of the study not supported by the results. Research on presbyLASIK to this date is mainly focused on case series generating a limited level of scientific evidence. The two NRCTs identified only demonstrated the potential benefit of combining the multiaspheric profile with some level of monovision in the non-dominant eye.

Early Outcomes of Two Treatment Modes of PresbyLASIK: Monocular vs. Micro-Monovision

PURPOSE

To report the visual, refractive and subjective outcomes of presbyLASIK for the correction of presbyopia.

METHODS

Monocular (20 eyes) or micro-monovision (12 eyes) presbyLASIK was performed on a total of 32 eyes in 16 patients (50% female, average age 55±4.6 years) using the Zeiss VisuMax 400Hz femtosecond and Schwind Amaris 1050RS excimer laser platform. Predictability, safety and efficacy were assessed and compared at 4-6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. Results were considered significant if P < 0.05.

RESULTS

For monocular treatments, average postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was 0.1±0.1 D and -0.86±0.5 D at 4-6 weeks postoperatively for distance and near eyes respectively; 90% eyes achieved SE ±1.0 D of the target. Postoperative binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near visual acuity (UNVA) were -0.03±0.1 LogMAR (20/20), 0.09±0.26 LogMAR (N4) and 0.29±0.11 LogMAR (N6) respectively with 90% patients achieving binocular UDVA of 20/20 or better. For micro-monovision treatments, average postoperative SE was -0.33±0.51 D and -1.60±0.78 D at 4-6 weeks postoperatively for distance and near eyes respectively; 100% eyes achieved SE ±1.0 D of the target. Postoperative binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were 0.05±0.16 LogMAR (20/20), -0.02±0.10 LogMAR (N3) and 0.23±0.08 LogMAR (N5) respectively with 67% patients achieving binocular UDVA of 20/20 or better.

CONCLUSION

Monocular and micro-monovision presbyLASIK are both effective options for the treatment of presbyopia. Monocular treatments are more likely to be well tolerated by patients who prefer to preserve exceptional distance vision, while micro-monovision treatments may be better suited to patients who can tolerate compromises in distance vision in order to attain greater intermediate vision function.

Spherical aberration for expanding depth of focus

The increase in the depth of focus (DoF) for the treatment of presbyopia or cataracts is a topic of great interest for anterior segment surgeons who have seen how new surgical possibilities to achieve DoF enlargement have emerged. Nowadays, several technologies to extend the DoF are available, from corneal laser refractive surgery procedures in presbyopia to intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in cataract or refractive lens exchange. Some of these procedures are based on aspheric profiles, either in the cornea or in the IOL, which modulate the spherical aberration (SA) and, therefore, extend the light energy on different focal planes. The aim of this narrative review was to give an overall picture about the reasons why there is not a general solution persistent along time of SA induction to extend DoF, especially considering that SA depends on pupil diameter and this decreases with age.

Multifocal Femto-PresbyLASIK in Pseudophakic Eyes

BACKGROUND

Presbyopia treatment in pseudophakic patients with a monofocal IOL is challenging. This study investigates the refractive results of femto-PresbyLASIK and analyzes presbyopia treatment in pseudophakic eyes.

METHODS

14 patients with 28 pseudophakic eyes were treated with femto-PresbyLASIK. The dominant eye was targeted at a distance and the non-dominant eye at -0.5 D. The presbyopic algorithm creates a steepness in the cornea center by using an excimer laser that leads to corneal multifocality.

RESULTS

6 months after surgery a refraction of -0.11 ± 0.13 D (p = 0.001), an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 0.05 ± 1.0 logMAR (p < 0.001) and an uncorrected near visual acuity of 0.15 ± 0.89 logMAR (p = 0.001) were achieved in the dominant eye. For the non-dominant eye, the refraction was -0.28 ± 0.22 D (p = 0.002), the uncorrected distance of visual acuity was 0.1 ± 1.49 logMAR, and the uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.11 ± 0.80 logMAR (p < 0.001). Spherical aberrations (Z400) were reduced by 0.21-0.3 µm in 32% of eyes, and by 0.31-0.4 µm in 26% of eyes.

CONCLUSION

By steepening the central cornea while maintaining spherical aberrations within acceptable limits, PresbyLASIK created a corneal multifocality that safely improved near vision in both eyes. Thus, femto-PresbyLASIK can be used to treat presbyopia in pseudophakic eyes without performing intraocular surgery.

PresbyLASIK: A review of PresbyMAX, Supracor, and laser blended vision: Principles, planning, and outcomes

PresbyLASIK is one of the most commonly used modalities of surgical correction in presbyopes with no cataract. Unlike monovision procedures, both the eyes are adjusted for near and distance, providing a good stereopsis. This works by creating a corneal multifocality and increasing the depth of focus. Most techniques of presbyLASIK currently employ hybrid methods, i.e., a component of monovision added on to a multifocal corneal ablation. Choosing an appropriate proportion of these two components according to the patients' requirements and meticulous patient selection are key to obtaining desirable outcomes. Being corneal-based procedures, presbyLASIK has shown to be reversible. Thorough updated knowledge of the different presbyLASIK procedures, their principles and outcomes based on previous studies is required before a refractive surgeon plans to start providing presbyLASIK services. We performed a comprehensive search on PubMed with the keywords "Presbyopia surgery," "PresbyLASIK" "PresbyMAX," "Supracor," and "Custom-Q." In this review article, we have explained the principles of the various presbyLASIK procedures, appropriate patient selection and planning on the devices with examples, and summarized the previously published outcomes of these techniques.

Laser Vision Correction for Regular Myopia and Supracor Presbyopia: A Comparison Study

A study to compare femto-presbyLASIK to standard myopia femto-LASIK refractive surgical correction with a total of 45 candidates was performed. The goal was to identify a more specific set of indications for presbyopia LASIK treatments. The results showed thoroughly good uncorrected visual acuity for myopia (decimal: 1.01 ± 0.15) as well as for presbyLASIK (decimal: 0.78 ± 0.17) corrections. Astigmatism was comparable in both groups and did not change significantly from preoperative (0.98D ± 0.53 SD) to postoperative (1.01D ± 0.50 SD). Our study results suggest, that presbyLASIK treatment is as safe and effective as regular LASIK myopia correction and can hence be recommended to treat presbyopia.