May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Comparison of Visual Outcomes of Wavefront Guided and Conventional LASIK
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • D.E. Setlik
    The Cornea and Laser Eye Institute, Teaneck, NJ
  • K.L. Fry
    The Cornea and Laser Eye Institute, Teaneck, NJ
    Ophthalmology, UMDNJ – New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
  • P.S. Hersh
    The Cornea and Laser Eye Institute, Teaneck, NJ
    Ophthalmology, UMDNJ – New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  D.E. Setlik, None; K.L. Fry, None; P.S. Hersh, Alcon Inc. C.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 4375. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      D.E. Setlik, K.L. Fry, P.S. Hersh; Comparison of Visual Outcomes of Wavefront Guided and Conventional LASIK . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):4375.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare visual outcomes between eyes treated using conventional and custom LASIK. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 271 eyes (166 patients) treated for myopia and/or astigmatism was performed using the LADARVision excimer laser. One hundred and eighty eyes (108 patients) were treated with conventional LASIK and 91 eyes (58 patients) with the LADARWave CustomCornea System. Outcome variables included UCVA, BCVA, predictability, and wavefront aberrations (6.0mm pupil). Preoperative and 3–month follow–up data (mean 110 days) were analyzed. Patients in both groups were matched for age, preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) (up to 6.25D) and astigmatism (up to 1.0D). Mean MRSE of conventional eyes was –3.69 ± 1.48 D and –3.42 ± 1.46D for custom treated eyes. Results: There was not a statistically significant difference in mean postoperative UCVA between groups. Mean UCVA was 20/24 in custom and 20/26 in conventionally–treated eyes, respectively. However, custom eyes were more likely to reach 20/20 UCVA; 60 custom eyes (66%) achieved ≥ 20/20 compared to 96 conventional eyes (53%) (p=0.047). Difference in BCVA between groups did not meet statistical significance; mean pre– and postoperative BCVA was 20/20 for both groups. Mean predictability for custom ablations was –0.33 ± 0.47 D and for conventional ablations was –0.32 ± 0.47 D. Sixty eyes (66%) treated with custom LASIK were within ±0.50 D of attempted correction compared with 122 eyes (71%) treated with conventional ablation (p>0.05). However, no statistical significance differences in predictability were found. Comparison of pre– and postoperative wavefront error showed that both procedures induced significant amounts of coma, spherical aberration, other and total aberrations. However, only 16% of custom ablations compared with 38% of conventional treatments induced ≥0.50 microns of RMS of total higher order aberrations (p=0.02). Conclusions: Both conventional and custom LASIK produce similar visual outcomes. However, eyes treated with custom LASIK were more likely to achieve 20/20 uncorrected vision and less likely to have induced wavefront aberrations after surgery.

Keywords: refractive surgery: LASIK • 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.

×