Purchase this article with an account.
G. O. Waring, IV, D. S. Durrie, R. T. Smith, J. E. Stahl; Comparing Conventional and Wavefront-Optimized LASIK for the Treatment of Hyperopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009;50(13):581.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To compare the differences in subjective and objective visual outcomes after conventional and wavefront-optimized (WFO) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the treatment of hyperopia.
In a prospective, randomized, single-center clinical trial, fifty-one consecutive eyes underwent LASIK for the treatment of hyperopia. Patients were divided evenly between groups treated with conventional Alcon LADAR4000 and wavefront-optimized Allegretto Wavelight. The refractive and visual outcomes, induced spherical aberrations, and contrast sensitivity were analyzed.
Postoperative day one, 20% of eyes treated with a conventional profile had UCDVA of 20/20 vision or better compared to 65% of eyes receiving WFO treatment (p=0.0011). By six months, UCDVA was 20/20 or better in 72% and 84% of the conventional and WFO groups respectively (p=0.31). Six month mean MRSE was -0.21 ± 0.47D and -0.16 ± 0.27D for the conventional and WFO groups respectively (p=0.65). Induced spherical aberration was -0.54 ± 0.32µ and -0.42 ± 0.21µ for the conventional and WFO groups respectively (p=0.1195). The respective change in mesopic and photopic area under the log contrast sensitivity function was -0.05 ± 0.29 and -0.05 ± 0.23 for the conventional group and 0.08 ± 0.39 and 0.08 ± 0.41 for WFO (p=0.1970). No patients lost more than one line of BCVA.
Both WFO and conventional ablation profiles predictably and safely correct low to moderate hyperopia. WFO showed superior results with regards to rapid visual recovery.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only