Comparison of clinical outcomes in PRK with a standard and aspherical optimized profile: a full case analysis of 100 eyes with 1-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: One hundred eyes from 55 adult patients with myopia were retrospectively studied to determine the comparative safety, efficacy, and predictability of aberration smart ablation (ASA) and a new advanced ablation algorithm (Triple-A) using the MEL(®) 80 excimer laser. METHODS: Fifty myopic eyes with a manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) between -1.0 diopters (D) and -9.75 D were consecutively treated with photorefractive keratec-tomy ASA, and 50 myopic eyes with an MRSE between -1.38 D and -11.0 D with photorefractive keratectomy Triple-A. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, MRSE, the absolute value of the cylinder, corrected distance visual acuity, and postoperative complications at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months (1 year) were descriptively analyzed and compared at 1 year. RESULTS: After 12 months, the MRSE variance was statistically significantly better in patients triaged to receive Triple-A compared with patients receiving ASA (ASA, ±0.7 D; Triple-A, ±0.15 D; P<0.001). Furthermore, no patient in the Triple-A group had any cylinder postoperatively. Patients in the Triple-A treatment arm achieved a superior result. No statistically significant difference in the two treatment arms was noted for the analysis of the mean MRSE at 12 months (P=0.78). CONCLUSION: Triple-A was more effective than standard aspherical surgical intervention in a number of treatment outcome parameters (eg, MRSE, astigmatism, efficacy index). The two surgical procedures were equivalent in terms of safety.

Wavefront-supported photorefractive keratectomy: 12-month follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability of wavefront-supported photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism, with 12-month follow-up. METHODS: Thirty eyes of 23 patients with myopia less than -8.00 D (mean -3.76 +/- 1.90 D) and cylinder less than -3.50 D (mean -0.81 +/- 0.71 D) were selected. Aberrometry measurements were taken with the Asclepion aberrometer in order to perform customized wavefront-supported PRK. Eyes were treated with the Asclepion MEL 70 excimer laser and were followed for 12 months. RESULTS: UCVA of 20/16 or better was achieved by 47% (14 eyes) at 1 month, 67% (20 eyes) at 3 months, 77% (23 eyes) at 6 months, 90% (27 eyes) at 9 months, and 83% (25 eyes) after 1 year. No eye lost more than 1 line of BSCVA at 3, 6, 9, or 12 months. Two eyes (7%) gained more than 2 lines 1 month postoperatively, and 13% (4 eyes) gained more than 2 lines at 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively. BSCVA of 20/10 or better was achieved in nine eyes (30%) at 1 and 12 months. Visual acuity under low contrast at 3 and 12 months after PRK was unchanged in 87% (26 eyes). Visual acuity under glare remained unchanged at 3 months after PRK in 86% (26 eyes) and at 12 months in 83% (25 eyes). CONCLUSION: Excimer laser wavefront-supported PRK with the Asclepion MEL 70 laser was safe and effective for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Daylight visual acuity and mesopic visual acuity outcomes remained stable over 1 year.

Intrastromal corneal ring implantation for the correction of myopia: 12-month follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, predictability, and stability of refraction obtained after intrastromal corneal ring segment (ICRS) implantation for low to moderate myopia. SETTING: Single-center clinical practice. METHODS: In this prospective 2-surgeon study, 9 patients (15 eyes) with low to moderate myopia were recruited to receive ICRS implants. RESULTS: At 1 day, 10 of the 15 eyes had an uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/40 or better. At 12 months, all eyes had this UCVA and 66.6% had 20/25 or better. The mean manifest refraction stabilized after the first week at <-0.5 diopter (D). At 12 months, all eyes were within +/-1.0 D of the intended manifest refraction; 67% were within +/-0.5 D. Sixty percent of eyes had no change from the preoperative best corrected visual acuity; 13.3% improved by 1 line, and 26.6% lost 1 line. The postoperative complications included lamellar channel deposits (n = 12), ICRS dislocation (n = 2), corneal infiltrates (n = 2), bleeding in the positioning ring hole (n = 1), 0.3 mm segment decentration (n = 1), and prolonged wound healing (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation for the correction of low to moderate myopia afforded good visual recovery and efficacy similar to that with laser in situ keratomileusis and superior to that with photorefractive keratectomy. However, light or blunt trauma and insufficient hygiene can have serious consequences and there is the potential for induced astigmatism. Corneal infiltrates can occur and must be treated immediately. The ring implantation technique is demanding. Advantages of ICRS implantation include rapid and stable visual recovery as well as reversibility.