April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Effect of Mechanical versus Femtosecond Keratome Flaps on Clinical Outcomes With the PresbyLens® Intracorneal Inlay for the Correction of Presbyopia
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • T. B. Porter
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • A. Lang
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • K. Holliday
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • G. Sharma
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • R. Zarling
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • A. Le
    ReVision Optics, Lake Forest, California
  • S. Gomez
    Laser Ocular Hidalgo, Monterrey, Mexico
  • E. Barragan
    Laser Ocular Hidalgo, Monterrey, Mexico
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  T.B. Porter, ReVision Optics, E; A. Lang, ReVision Optics, E; K. Holliday, ReVision Optics, E; G. Sharma, ReVision Optics, E; R. Zarling, ReVision Optics, E; A. Le, ReVision Optics, E; S. Gomez, Laser Ocular Hidalgo, C; E. Barragan, Laser Ocular Hidalgo, C.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 2867. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      T. B. Porter, A. Lang, K. Holliday, G. Sharma, R. Zarling, A. Le, S. Gomez, E. Barragan; Effect of Mechanical versus Femtosecond Keratome Flaps on Clinical Outcomes With the PresbyLens® Intracorneal Inlay for the Correction of Presbyopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):2867. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose:
 

To determine whether the flap-making device (mechanical keratome versus femtosecond laser) affects visual acuity outcomes with implantation of the PrebyLens® hydrogel corneal inlay in emmetropic presbyopes.

 
Methods:
 

LASIK-style flaps were cut for 39 presbyopic emmetropes using a mechanical keratome (Hansatome®, MK) and 20 subjects using a femtosecond laser keratome (IntraLase®, IL). The mean ages (50, 49), mean preop SE (0.20 D, 0.07 D), and mean add requirement (1.8 D, 1.7 D) were similar for both groups. All subjects received a 2.0 mm diameter PresbyLenses. The study was under an IRB-approved protocol. The Optec® 6500 Vision Tester was used to record mesopic UCDVA, photopic UCIVA, and photopic UCNVA. OCT images were analyzed for flap bed curvatures.

 
Results:
 

The only statistically significant (p < 0.05) finding was that post-op UCNVA was better for the IL group though UCDVA was better and more improved at a statistically less significant level (p < 0.1) for the MK group. Analysis of OCT (Optovue®) images showed no difference in mean flap bed radii of curvatures (MK = 7.8 ± 0.27 mm, IL = 7.9 ± 0.17 mm). Differences in the standard deviation of the post-op UCNVA were also observed; MK at 0.15 ± 0.15 logMAR and IL at 0.04 ± 0.09 logMAR.  

 
Conclusions:
 

Both flap making methods provide significant improvement in UCNVA and UCIVA with the PrebyLens® intracorneal inlay. Better and more improved UCNVA was observed for the IL flaps, possibly due to their greater consistency of flap bed geometry.

 
Keywords: cornea: clinical science • presbyopia • refractive surgery 
×
×

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.

×