April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Vector analysis of compound myopic astigmatism comparing wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized excimer platforms
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Brian C Toy
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
  • Edward E Manche
    Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Brian Toy, None; Edward Manche, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 1518. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Brian C Toy, Edward E Manche; Vector analysis of compound myopic astigmatism comparing wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized excimer platforms. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):1518.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose
 

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

 
Methods
 

Seventy-two eyes of 36 patients underwent LASIK for compound myopic astigmatism with the Alcon Wavelight Allegretto Eye-Q 400 laser platform. One eye underwent WFG-LASIK, and the contralateral eye underwent WFO-LASIK. Preoperative and postoperative assessments were performed and included manifest refraction, vector analysis, topographic analysis, and wavefront aberrometry analysis. Eyes were stratified for subgroup analysis based on preoperative manifest astigmatism: 0.25-1, 1.25-2.25, and 2.5-3.5 diopters. Statistics were calculated using t-tests.

 
Results
 

Preoperatively, mean spherical equivalent (SE) was -4.0±1.7 vs -3.9±1. diopters(D) (p=0.67), and mean cylindrical error(CE) was 0.7±0.5 vs 0.8±0.8D (p=0.47) in the Alcon-WFG and Alcon-WFO groups, respectively. At postoperative month 12, mean SE was -0.2 ±0.3 vs -0.3±0.3D (p=0.03), and mean CE was 0.2±0.2 vs 0.1±0.2D (p=0.46), respectively. Alpins vector analyses for the Alcon-WFG and Alcon-WFO groups, respectively, were: surgically-induced-astigmatism (0.8±0.6 vs 0.8±0.8D, p=0.94), error-magnitude (0.1±0.2 vs 0.1±0.2D, p=0.77), error-angle (10±37° vs 19±44°, p=0.4), correction-index (1.1±0.3 vs 1±0.3, p=0.1), success-index (0.2±0.3 vs 0.2±0.4, p=0.45), and flattening-index (0.8±0.5 vs 0.9±0.8, p=0.19). Subgroup analysis by preoperative astigmatism showed no significant differences.

 
Conclusions
 

Minimal difference in outcomes between Alcon-WFG and Alcon-WFO platforms based on objective Alpins analysis of astigmatism.

 
Keywords: 479 cornea: clinical science • 683 refractive surgery: LASIK • 679 refractive surgery: comparative studies  
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×