Laser in Situ Keratomileusis for Myopia and Hyperopia Using the Lasersight 200 Laser in 300 Consecutive Eyes

The 25th Anniversary of Laser Vision Correction in the United States

Laser Vision Correction (LVC) is an elective, self-pay and safe surgical procedure to correct myopia and hyperopia. Since FDA approval 25 years ago, there have been a progression of technological improvements leading to better outcomes and LVC is now one of the safest surgical procedures. With a potential pool of 50 million patients, 6000 trained ophthalmic surgeons regularly treating in over 1000 centers of which 65% are physician owned. Treatments remain low from an earlier peak of 1.4 million to less than 800,000 over last 10 years. The factors preventing patients undergoing surgery have not changed and include the cost of $2000 ± $1000 per eye and fear of laser surgery on their eyes. The latter is overcome by word of mouth referrals and positive social media messaging. In addition, press misinformation and lack of optometrists participating in co-management have not helped grow LVC procedures despite the positive results of the FDA’s Patient Reported Outcomes with LASIK studies known as PROWL. The surgery is quick, and patients can be “in and out” in less than two hours with a rapid recovery, minimal postoperative restrictions and within 24 hours have 20/20 vision. Volume and price drives center and physician profitability with a scheduling capacity of two to four patients’ treatments per hour. Laser vision correction and especially LASIK, remains the treatment of choice for myopic and hyperopic patients wanting to remove their dependency on glasses and contact lenses.

[A prospective intraindividual comparison between laser in situ keratomileusis and laser subepithelial keratectomy for myopia. 1-year follow-up results]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to intraindividually compare the outcome of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and laser subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) in patients with similar refraction in both eyes when treated with two different procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective nonrandomized study, 30 myopic patients with and without astigmatism were treated by Lasik in one eye and LasEk in the fellow eye. All eyes were treated using the MEL 70-G Excimer laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany). Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) as well as photopic contrast sensitivity (Pelli-Robson charts) and scotopic contrast sensitivity (Nyktometer, Rodenstock, Germany) were evaluated. The patients were also asked about their preferences regarding the procedures.

RESULTS

The preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was -4.54+/-1.64 D and the mean BSCVA was 0.94 in Lasik eyes. The SE was -3.9+/-1.57 D and the BSCVA was 0.89 in LASEK eyes. The mean 1-year post-operative SE was -0.33+/-0.48 D in the Lasik eyes and -0.19+/-0.26 D in the LASEK eyes. Efficacy and safety were similar in the two groups, but Lasik eyes had a greater standard deviation at 1 year. Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity was 10.75+/-3.05 in the Lasik eyes compared with 11.4+/-3.21 in the fellow LASEK eyes. Seventeen patients named Lasik and 12 patients named LASEK as their procedure of choice.

CONCLUSION

Both procedures enable similarly good results. LASEK showed a tendency to a smaller standard deviation in final refraction and better contrast sensitivity.

A control-matched comparison of laser epithelial keratomileusis and laser in situ keratomileusis for low to moderate myopia

PURPOSE

To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the treatment of low to moderate myopia.

DESIGN

Retrospective, nonrandomized, control-matched study.

METHODS

The charts of 2257 eyes that underwent LASEK or LASIK treatment were reviewed. Patients who were 21 years of age or older having between -0.75 and -6.00 diopters (D) of myopia with up to -2.25 D of astigmatism were included. One hundred twenty-two LASEK-treated eyes were matched with 122 LASIK-treated eyes having preoperative spheres, cylinders, and spherical equivalent (SE) within +/-0.50 D. Both groups had similar preoperative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), laser platform, and follow-up durations. Outcome measures were visual and refractive results.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, the mean SE was -3.50 +/- 1.40 D for LASEK and -3.50 +/- 1.42 D for LASIK (P = .59). Postoperatively, the mean logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 0.01 +/- 0.08 (20/21) for LASEK and 0.06 +/- 0.12 (20/23) for LASIK; the mean SE was -0.15 +/- 0.40 D for LASEK and -0.37 +/- 0.45 D for LASIK; and the mean logMAR of BSCVA was -0.03 +/- 0.06 (20/19) for LASEK and -0.02 +/- 0.05 (20/19) for LASIK. No eye lost 2 or more lines of BSCVA in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Slight differences in the visual and refractive results between LASEK and LASIK were observed, despite the use of the same nomogram. Both procedures were safe, effective, and predictable. Nomogram adjustment may be necessary for LASIK surgeons adopting surface ablation.

Surgical Correction of Hyperopia

Surgical attempts to correct hyperopia have yielded varying results over the last 130 years. These techniques include the reshaping of the cornea through incisions, burns, or lamellar cuts with removal of peripheral tissue; the addition of central inlays; laser ablations; and the replacement of the crystalline lens. By examining the success of each surgical technique, the refractive surgeon may be able to make an informed decision on its indications and limitations, based on the specific patient's characteristics. Reporting the outcomes and complications of hyperopic surgery will help refine our approach to the management of an increasingly hyperopic and presbyopic population.

Two-year follow-up of conductive keratoplasty for the treatment of hyperopic astigmatism

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability of conductive keratoplasty (CK) for the treatment of hyperopic astigmatism.

SETTING

University of Crete Medical School, Vardinoyannion Eye Institute of Crete, Heraklion, Greece.

METHODS

In this prospective nonrandomized noncontrolled single-center study, 47 eyes of 34 patients (15 women and 19 men) were treated for hyperopic astigmatism (up to + 3.50 diopters [D]) with a Refractec ViewPoint CK system and followed for 24 months +/- 0.6 (SD). The treatment consisted of 4 to 36 spots applied to the periphery of the cornea. Mean age was 48.5 years +/- 9.7 years, range 25 to 68 years. All the treated eyes were analyzed for safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 48.5 +/- 9.7 years (range 25 to 68 years). Preoperatively, the mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was +2.11 +/- 0.88 D (range -0.50 to + 4.13 D); at 12 months, it was -0.52 +/- 0.73 D and at 24 months, -0.50 +/- 0.77 D. At 24 months, the mean MRSE was within +/-0.50 D in 61% of eyes, within +/-1.00 D in 83%, and within +/-2.00 D in all eyes. At 24 months, the uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 37% of eyes and 20/40 or better in 97%. By the end of the follow-up period, no eye had lost > or =2 Snellen lines or had an induced cylinder > or =1.50 D.

CONCLUSIONS

Conductive keratoplasty for low hyperopic astigmatism was a safe, effective, and stable procedure. Nomogram adjustments and careful patient selection should contribute to higher levels of predictability when treating hyperopic astigmatism.

Long-term results of conductive keratoplasty for low to moderate hyperopia

PURPOSE

To assess the long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability of conductive keratoplasty (CK) for the treatment of low to moderate hyperopia and to evaluate the impact of the procedure on the quality of vision.

SETTING

University of Crete, Medical School, Vardinoyannion Eye Institute of Crete, Crete, Greece.

METHODS

In this prospective nonrandomized noncontrolled single-center study, 38 eyes of 26 patients (13 women and 13 men) were treated for hyperopia with a Refractec ViewPoint CK system and followed for 30 months. Preoperatively, the mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was +1.89 diopters (D) +/- 0.6 (SD) (range +1.00 to +3.25 D), and the mean follow-up was 30.9 +/- 1.1 months. All eyes were treated with the regular CK nomogram for the treatment of spherical hyperopia. The treatment consisted of 8 to 32 spots applied to the periphery of the cornea. Mean age was 50.3 +/- 8.8 years (range 31 to 71 years). All treated eyes were analyzed for safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability.

RESULTS

At 12 months, the MRSE was -0.06 +/- 0.8 D and at 30 months was -0.02 +/- 0.7 D. At 30 months, the mean MRSE was within +/-0.50 D in 68%, within +/-1.00 D in 92%, and within +/-2.00 D in all eyes. At 30 months, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 52.5% and 20/40 or better in 89% of eyes. No eye lost 2 or more Snellen lines or had an induced cylinder of 2.00 D or greater. The procedure did not cause statistically significant changes in contrast sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

Results show that CK for low to moderate hyperopia is a safe, effective, predictable, and stable procedure.

Laser in situ keratomileusis for different degrees of myopia

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy, predictability, stability and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in treating patients with different degrees of myopia.

METHODS

We enrolled 386 eyes of 200 consecutive patients who underwent LASIK and divided them into four groups according to their degree of preoperative spherical equivalent (SE). Group 1 eyes ranged between - 1.00 and - 3.99 dioptres (D) (low myopia). Group 2 eyes ranged between - 4.00 and - 5.99 D (moderate myopia). Group 3 eyes ranged between - 6.00 and - 9.99 D (high myopia). Group 4 eyes were over - 9.99 D (extreme myopia). Follow-up was at 1 day, 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 12 and 18 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Our study included 386 eyes of 200 patients with SE ranging from - 3.00 to - 16.00 D (mean - 7.14 +/- 2.87 D). All eyes were seen at 1 day postoperatively. A total of 360 eyes (93%) were examined at 1 week, 330 eyes (85%) at 1 month, 281 eyes (73%) at 3 months, 247 eyes (64%) at 6 months, 199 eyes (52%) at 12 months and 142 eyes (37%) at 18 months. The postoperative data from 1 day to 12 months were used because of the low follow-up rate at 18 months postoperatively. Group 1 consisted of 30 eyes. The mean SE was - 3.52 +/- 0.43 D preoperatively and - 0.40 +/- 0.58 D at 1 month, - 0.46 +/- 0.60 D at 6 months and - 0.42 +/- 0.50 D at 12 months postoperatively. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 20/40 or better in 95% of eyes at 1 day and in 100% of eyes at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Group 2 consisted of 151 eyes. The mean SE was - 5.36 +/- 0.67 D preoperatively and - 0.54 +/- 0.78 D at 1 month, - 0.56 +/- 0.90 D at 6 months and - 0.55 +/- 0.82 D at 12 months postoperatively. Uncorrected VA was 20/40 or better in 95% of eyes at 1 day and in 100% of eyes at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Group 3 consisted of 167 eyes. The mean SE was - 8.15 +/- 0.94 D preoperatively and - 0.58 +/- 0.90 D at 1 month, - 0.67 +/- 1.00 D at 6 months and - 0.64 +/- 0.95 D at 12 months postoperatively. Uncorrected VA was 20/40 or better in 90% of eyes at 1 day and in 98% of eyes at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Group 4 consisted of 38 eyes. The mean SE was - 11.09 +/- 1.10 D preoperatively and - 1.25 +/- 1.20 D at 1 month, - 1.13 +/- 1.30 D at 6 months and - 1.20 +/- 1.25 D at 12 months postoperatively. Uncorrected VA was 20/40 or better in 78% of eyes at 1 day, in 94% at 6 months and in 90% at 12 months postoperatively. Intraoperative complications (free cap) occurred in two eyes and postoperative complications were observed in three eyes, making the total complications rate 1.29% (5/386). Seven eyes lost one Snellen line of BCVA, five lost two lines and two lost more than two lines (total: 3.64%, 14/386).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, LASIK is effective, predictable and safe for correcting myopia but is more accurate for correcting myopia up to -10.00 D. With more improvement in algorithms and ablation profile, we believe that LASIK can offer better results for higher myopia.

LASIK for hyperopia, hyperopic astigmatism, and mixed astigmatism

OBJECTIVE

To describe LASIK for hyperopia, hyperopia with astigmatism, and mixed astigmatism and to examine the evidence to answer questions about the safety and efficacy of the procedure.

METHODS

A literature search conducted for the years 1968 to 2002 retrieved 118 citations. During review and preparation of this article, an additional 2 articles were included. The panel members selected 36 articles for the panel methodologist to review and rate according to the strength of evidence. A level I rating is assigned to properly conducted, well-designed, randomized clinical trials; a level II rating to well-designed cohort and case-control studies; and a level III rating to case series, case reports, and poorly designed prospective and retrospective studies.

RESULTS

This assessment describes 5 nonrandomized interventional trials (level II), 3 nonrandomized comparative trials (level III), and 20 noncomparative case series (level III). Additionally, 6 single-case reports (level III) were included because they reported relevant complications, and 2 theoretical analyses (level III) were also considered. This assessment does not compare studies because many variables such as range of hyperopia, follow-up periods, lasers, microkeratomes, techniques, and surgeon experience have not been controlled.

CONCLUSIONS

For low (<3 diopters [D]) to moderate (3-5 D) hyperopia, results from published studies (levels II and III evidence) have shown that LASIK is effective and predictable in achieving very good to excellent uncorrected visual acuity, achieving postoperative refractions within 1 D of emmetropia, and is safe in terms of minimal loss of best-corrected spectacle vision. Although there are fewer data for hyperopic astigmatism, the results available seem to mirror the data for low to moderate hyperopia (levels II and III evidence). The postoperative results for both uncorrected vision and safety are less compelling, as greater amounts of hyperopia are treated (>4 to 5 D). Utilizing hyperopic LASIK for the treatment of consecutive hyperopia and astigmatism is also effective, although the ability to reduce hyperopic astigmatism after radial keratotomy is limited. Although a variety of ablation profiles can be used to treat mixed astigmatism, very good visual results have been reported (levels II and III evidence). Serious adverse complications leading to permanent visual loss are possible but, fortunately, very rare. There are insufficient data to compare one laser system with another or one ablation profile with another.

Laser in situ keratomileusis for hyperopia with the LADARVision 4000 with centration on the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex

PURPOSE

To analyze the visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and target deviations in patients who had laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for primary hyperopia with the ablation centered on the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex.

SETTING

University-based refractive surgery practice.

METHODS

Retrospective review comprised 37 consecutive patients (61 eyes) who had LASIK for hyperopia with the LADARVision 4000 excimer laser (Alcon Laboratories). Preoperative and 3-month postoperative visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, as well as the target deviation, were assessed for each eye. The change in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), best spectacle-corrected contrast sensitivity (BSCCS), and target deviation from the intended correction were analyzed.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, the uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 20/20 or better in 44.4% of eyes. The mean deviation from target was +0.25 diopter (D) +/- 0.82 (SD), with 65.6% of eyes within +/-0.50 D of target. None eye lost 2 or more lines of BSCVA. A loss of 3 or more patches of BSCCS were seen in 6.6% of the eyes and a loss of 4 or more patches, in 1.6%.

CONCLUSION

Hyperopic LASIK with LADARVision 4000 with the ablation zone centered on the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex did not adversely affect BSCVA and BSCCS.

Conductive Keratoplasty for Low to Moderate Hyperopia: 1-year Results

PURPOSE

To assess the safety, efficacy, and stability of conductive keratoplasty in the treatment of low to moderate hyperopia and evaluate the impact of the procedure on the quality of vision.

METHODS

Thirty-six eyes (25 patients; 13 female and 12 male) were treated for hyperopia up to +3.25 D with a Refractec ViewPoint CK system and followed for 1 year. Mean age was 50.2 +/- 8.7 years (range 31 to 71).

RESULTS

Before surgery, mean spherical equivalent refraction was +1.90 +/- 0.60 D (range +1.00 to +3.25 D), decreasing at 1 year after conductive keratoplasty to -0.06 +/- 0.80 D, and was within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia in 68% (24 eyes) and within +/- 2.00 D in all eyes. Twelve months after conductive keratoplasty, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 19 eyes (50%) and 20/40 or better in 32 eyes (89%). No eye lost > or = 2 Snellen lines or had induced cylinder > or = 2.00 D. The mean root mean square values for higher order optical aberrations were 0.060 +/- 0.039 before and 0.174 +/- 0.170 at 3 months after surgery. No statistically significant changes in contrast sensitivity were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Conductive keratoplasty for low to moderate hyperopia provided safe, effective, and stable results both in refraction and quality of vision.

Ablation centration in myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. comparing the Visx S3 ActiveTrak and the Visx S2

PURPOSE

To compare ablation centration and outcome measurements in myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using the eye-tracking Visx S3 ActiveTrak and the nontracking Visx S2 excimer lasers.

SETTING

University-based refractive surgery practice.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, 71 consecutively treated myopic eyes that had LASIK with the Visx Star S3 ActiveTrak were compared to 71 control-matched eyes treated with the Visx Star S2 without pupil tracking. Primary outcome variables including ablation centration, uncorrected visual acuity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, complications, and induced cylinder analyzed by vector analysis were evaluated 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The myopia ranged from -1.50 to -11.25 diopters (D) and the cylinder, from +0.25 to +2.75 D. Ninety-four of 142 eyes (66%) were available for analysis at 3 months; 50 eyes could be used to analyze ablation centration. At 3 months, the mean decentration of the ablation zone from the entrance pupil was 0.22 mm +/- 0.20 (SD) in tracked eyes (n = 25) and 0.21 +/- 0.26 mm in nontracked eyes (n = 25) (P =.88). Three eyes (12%) in the tracked group were decentered 0.5 to 1.0 mm, and 1 eye (4%) in the nontracked group was decentered more than 1.0 mm. All other eyes were decentered less than 0.5 mm. There was an association in the tracked group between greater decentrations and higher levels of myopia (r = 0.67), but this association did not exist in the nontracked group (r = -0.03).

CONCLUSION

Comparable ablation centration as well as visual and refractive outcomes can be achieved with and without active eye tracking during myopic and astigmatic myopic LASIK.

Laser in situ Keratomileusis for Compound Myopic Astigmatism Using the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan Excimer Laser

PURPOSE

To determine the safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in treating patients with myopic astigmatism using the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser.

METHODS

Seventy-four eyes of 42 patients with myopia ranging from -4.50 to -9.88 D and astigmatism ranging from 0.50 to 4.00 D who underwent LASIK with the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser and the Summit Krumeich-Barraquer microkeratome were studied. Patients were followed for 1 year.

RESULTS

Mean baseline spherical equivalent refraction was -7.12 +/- 1.70 D and cylinder was 1.62 +/- 1.72 D. At 12 months, mean postoperative spherical equivalent refraction was -0.49 +/- 0.57 D and mean refractive cylinder was 0.59 +/- 0.32 D. Mean change in spherical equivalent refraction between 1 and 12 months after surgery was -0.09 +/- 0.31 D, toward myopia. At baseline, no eyes had best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) of 20/20 or better, and 65% had 20/40 or better. At 12 months after surgery, 10% of eyes had BSCVA of 20/20 or better and 88% of eyes had 20/40 or better. The unusually low postoperative BSCVA results were thought to be due to amblyopia or existence of a higher percentage of some optical aberrations in this group of eyes. Mean uncorrected visual acuity was -1.38 +/- 0.42 LogMAR units (20/400) at baseline and -0.29 +/- 0.25 LogMAR units (20/40) at the 12-month postoperative examination. No eyes lost two or more lines of spectacle-corrected visual acuity. No vision threatening complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

LASIK with the Meditec MEL 70 G-Scan excimer laser appeared to be safe, effective, reasonably predictable, and stable for correction of myopic astigmatism with a spherical component between -4.25 and -8.25 D and a cylindrical component between 0.50 and 4.00 D. However, astigmatism was slightly undercorrected with the algorithm used.

Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and astigmatism: safety and efficacy: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

OBJECTIVE

This document describes laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia and astigmatism and examines the evidence to answer key questions about the efficacy and safety of the procedure.

METHODS

A literature search conducted for the years 1968 to 2000 retrieved 486 citations and an update search conducted in June 2001 yielded an additional 243 articles. The panel members reviewed 160 of these articles and selected 47 for the panel methodologist to review and rate according to the strength of evidence. A Level I rating is assigned to properly conducted, well-designed, randomized clinical trials; a Level II rating is assigned to well-designed cohort and case-control studies; and a Level III rating is assigned to case series and poorly designed prospective and retrospective studies, including case-control studies.

RESULTS

The assessment describes randomized controlled trials published in 1997 or later (Level I evidence) and more recent comparative and noncomparative case series (Level II and Level III evidence), focusing on results for safety and effectiveness. It is difficult to extrapolate results from these studies that are comparable to current practices with the most recent generation lasers because of the rapid evolution of LASIK technology and techniques. It is also difficult to compare studies because of variations in the range of preoperative myopia, follow-up periods, lasers, nomograms, microkeratomes and techniques, the time frame of the study, and the investigators' experience.

CONCLUSIONS

For low to moderate myopia, results from studies in the literature have shown that LASIK is effective and predictable in terms of obtaining very good to excellent uncorrected visual acuity and that it is safe in terms of minimal loss of visual acuity. For moderate to high myopia (>6.0 D), the results are more variable, given the wide range of preoperative myopia. The results are similar for treated eyes with mild to moderate degrees of astigmatism (<2.0 D). Serious adverse complications leading to significant permanent visual loss such as infections and corneal ectasia probably occur rarely in LASIK procedures; however, side effects such as dry eyes, night time starbursts, and reduced contrast sensitivity occur relatively frequently. There were insufficient data in prospective, comparative trials to describe the relative advantages and disadvantages of different lasers or nomograms.

Hyperopic refractive surgery

Although the first attempts at hyperopia correction were made more than 100 years ago, it is only in the past several years that the success of hyperopic refractive surgery has begun to approach the efficacy of myopia surgery. Corneal surgery for the correction of hyperopia includes older lamellar techniques such as automated lamellar keratoplasty and epikeratophakia, and more recently photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis. The latter two procedures have shown the most success. Using large diameter laser ablations and improved keratomes, laser in situ keratomileusis has become a realistic alternative for corrections of up to 4 or 5 diopters with astigmatic corrections. Laser thermal keratoplasty using the Holmium or diode laser and contact techniques also have gained popularity and shown some potential. Collagen shrinkage procedures are easy to perform and have relatively few complications, but over correction and regression are problems. Crystalline lens surgery and phakic intraocular lenses are being investigated actively and are promising; however, safety issues persist. The surgical treatments of hyperopia present a significant challenge and reward for the ophthalmic surgeon.