Influence of the difference between corneal and refractive astigmatism on LASIK outcomes using solid-state technology.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of the difference between preoperative corneal and refractive astigmatism [ocular residual astigmatism (ORA)] on outcomes obtained after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) surgery for correction of myopic astigmatism using the solid-state laser technology. METHODS: One hundred one consecutive eyes with myopia or myopic astigmatism of 55 patients undergoing LASIK surgery using the Pulzar Z1 solid-state laser (CustomVis Laser Pty Ltd, currently CV Laser) were included. Visual and refractive changes at 6 months postoperatively and changes in ORA and anterior corneal astigmatism and posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) were analyzed. RESULTS: Postoperatively, uncorrected distance visual acuity improved significantly (P < 0.01). Likewise, refractive cylinder magnitude and spherical equivalent were reduced significantly (P < 0.01). In contrast, no significant changes were observed in ORA magnitude (P = 0.81) and anterior corneal astigmatism (P = 0.12). The mean overall efficacy and safety indices were 0.96 and 1.01, respectively. These indices were not correlated with preoperative ORA (r = -0.15, P = 0.15). Furthermore, a significant correlation was found between ORA (r = 0.81, P < 0.01) and PCA postoperatively, but not preoperatively (r = 0.12, P = 0.25). Likewise, a significant correlation of ORA with manifest refraction was only found postoperatively (r = -0.38, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of ORA does not seem to be a predictive factor of efficacy and safety of myopic LASIK using a solid-state laser platform. The higher relevance of PCA after surgery in some cases may explain the presence of unexpected astigmatic residual refractive errors.

Algorithm for correcting the keratometric error in the estimation of the corneal power in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery.

PURPOSE: To calculate theoretically the errors in the estimation of corneal power when using the keratometric index (nk) in eyes that underwent laser refractive surgery for the correction of myopia and to define and validate clinically an algorithm for minimizing such errors. METHODS: Differences between corneal power estimation by using the classical nk and by using the Gaussian equation in eyes that underwent laser myopic refractive surgery were simulated and evaluated theoretically. Additionally, an adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) model dependent on r1c was developed for minimizing these differences. The model was validated clinically by retrospectively using the data from 32 myopic eyes [range, -1.00 to -6.00 diopters (D)] that had undergone laser in situ keratomileusis using a solid-state laser platform. The agreement between Gaussian (Pc) and adjusted keratometric (Pkadj) corneal powers in such eyes was evaluated. RESULTS: It was found that overestimations of corneal power up to 3.5 D were possible for nk = 1.3375 according to our simulations. The nk value to avoid the keratometric error ranged between 1.2984 and 1.3297. The following nkadj models were obtained: nkadj = -0.0064286r1c + 1.37688 (Gullstrand eye model) and nkadj = -0.0063804r1c + 1.37806 (Le Grand). The mean difference between Pkadj and Pc was 0.00 D, with limits of agreement of -0.45 and +0.46 D. This difference correlated significantly with the posterior corneal radius (r = -0.94, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a single nk for estimating the corneal power in eyes that underwent a laser myopic refractive surgery can lead to significant errors. These errors can be minimized by using a variable nk dependent on r1c.