Three-Month Comprehensive Outcomes of Topography-Guided LASIK Versus Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction (KLEx): A Prospective Contralateral Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of topography-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (TG-LASIK) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE®) for correcting myopia and myopic astigmatism. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized contralateral study, 34 patients (68 eyes) received TG-LASIK in one eye, and SMILE in their fellow eye. Efficacy, safety, predictability, higher-order aberrations, corneal tomography, biomechanics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed preoperatively and up to 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Both platforms showed comparable efficacy at 3 months (TG-LASIK 1.08 ± 0.19; SMILE 0.98 ± 0.17, p = 0.055). However, TG-LASIK demonstrated quicker visual recovery, with 63% and 89% achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/16 or better at 1 day and 1 week, respectively, compared to SMILE (34% and 63%; p < 0.05). Safety index at 3 months did not significantly differ between TG-LASIK and SMILE (p = 0.223). TG-LASIK and SMILE had 44% and 56% of eyes within 0.13 D of spherical equivalent (SEQ) target, respectively. SMILE induced more total higher-order aberrations (HOAs), vertical coma, and oblique trefoil than TG-LASIK at 3 months (p < 0.05). Both platforms showed similar increases in epithelial remodeling, but SMILE induced thicker epithelium than TG-LASIK at the 7.0-mm nasal zonal area. No significant differences were found in corneal hysteresis (CH) or corneal resistance factor (CRF) at 3 months (p > 0.05). Reported symptoms of glare, halos, rings, starbursts, or dry eye did not significantly differ between groups at 3 months (p > 0.05). Overall, 59% of patients preferred their TG-LASIK treated eye at 1 month, but 65% of patients had no specific eye preference at 3 months. CONCLUSION: TG-LASIK and SMILE demonstrate excellent and comparable efficacy, safety, and predictability at 3 months, but TG-LASIK offers faster postoperative visual recovery at 1 day and 1 week. TG-LASIK induces fewer HOAs than SMILE, but both procedures affect corneal biomechanics similarly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincialTrials.gov identifier, NCT05611294.

The Utilization of Topical Insulin for Ocular Surface Diseases: A Narrative Review.

Various etiologies, including diabetic keratopathy (DK), dry eye disease (DED), and neurotrophic keratopathy (NK), can disrupt corneal homeostasis, exacerbating corneal epithelial defects. Topical insulin has emerged as a promising therapy for promoting corneal wound healing and addressing underlying pathologies. This review systematically evaluates the efficacy of topical insulin across different corneal disorders. A literature review was conducted across the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus research databases. The search resulted in a total of 19 articles, consisting of clinical trials, retrospective studies, and case reports. In DK, topical insulin accelerates corneal wound healing post-vitreoretinal surgery with lower concentrations showing higher outcomes when compared to conventional therapy, possibly due to improved epithelial stem cell migration. In comparison, the dry-eye disease results are inconclusive regarding patient-reported outcomes and corneal staining. For NK, topical insulin accelerates corneal wound healing and restores corneal nerve sensation. Other persistent epithelial defect (PED) etiologies that have been treated with topical insulin are infection, immune-mediated, mechanical and chemical trauma, and chronic ocular surface alterations. Although individual mechanisms for the benefits of topical insulin for each of these etiologies have not been studied, the literature demonstrates that topical insulin is efficacious for PEDs regardless of etiology. Future clinical trials need to be conducted to further evaluate optimal dosing, duration, and use of topical insulin for the restoration of the corneal surface.

Addressing corneal opacity after herpes zoster infection.

A 15-year-old boy was referred for corneal opacity evaluation. The patient had a previous herpes zoster virus (HZV) infection-varicella-zoster virus (VZV)-with ocular manifestation 1 year ago. After the infection, he developed a central corneal scar and decreased corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) in the right eye. The slitlamp examination showed the right eye with central corneal opacity (involving anterior stroma), lacuna area between the haze, fluorescein negative, and no vascularization near the scar (Figure 1JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202406000-00019/figure1/v/2024-07-10T174224Z/r/image-tiff). The patient had been treated with oral valacyclovir and topical corticosteroids without any improvement of visual acuity or changes in opacity within the 1-year follow-up. His CDVA was 20/200 (-4.50 -0.75 × 25) in the right eye and counting fingers (-4.00) in the left eye. Intraocular pressure was 12 mm Hg in both eyes. Fundoscopy was normal in the right eye, but he had a macular scar in the left eye (diagnosed when he was 7 years). The left eye had no cornea signs. The patient has no comorbidity or previous surgeries. Considering this case, a corneal central scar in a 15-year-old boy, legally single eye only, and assuming it is an opacity in the anterior stroma, would you consider surgery for this patient? If so, which would you choose: Would you consider an excimer laser treatment of his ametropia while partially removing his opacity, a phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK), or a PTK followed by a topography-guided treatment, femtosecond laser-assisted anterior lamellar keratoplasty (FALK), or deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) or penetrating keratoplasty (depending on the scar depth)? Would you consider prophylactic acyclovir during and after surgery? Would you consider any other surgical step to prevent delayed corneal healing-persistent epithelial defect? Before the surgical approach, would you consider treating this patient with topical losartan (a transforming growth factor [TGF]-ß signaling inhibitor)? Would you first perform the surgery (which one) and then start the medication? Furthermore, if so, how long would you treat this patient? Would you consider treatment with another medication?

Refractive surgical approaches to keratoconus: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Advancements in diagnostic methods and surgical techniques for keratoconus (KC) have increased non-invasive treatment options. Successful surgical planning for KC involves a combination of clinical science, empirical evidence, and surgical expertise. Assessment of disease progression is crucial, and halting the progression should be the focus if it is progressive. While surgeons used to rely on experience alone to decide the surgical method, comparing the network of primary factors, such as visual acuity, across studies can help them choose the most appropriate treatments for each patient and achieve optimal outcomes. Meticulous tabulation methods facilitate interpretation, highlighting the importance of selecting the correct surgical and rehabilitation approach based on each patient's condition and stage of the disease. We detail the outcomes of a comprehensive network meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of various combined therapeutic refractive treatments for KC at identical stages of the disease, spanning 4 distinct follow-up intervals. Additionally, the comprehensive analysis suggests that for corneas with optimal best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) preoperatively (classified as regular), combining phakic intraocular lenses with intracorneal ring segments (ICRS) and corneal cross-linking (CXL) could offer the best therapeutic approach provided the disease stage does not exceed stage 3. For irregular corneas, although initial follow-ups show a significant difference in BCVA with surface ablation, longer-term follow-ups recommend combining surface ablation with ICRS and CXL, especially at higher stages.

Precision in IOL Calculation for Cataract Patients with Prior History of Combined RK and LASIK Histories.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of 12 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulae for eyes that have undergone both radial keratotomy (RK) and laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) surgery to determine the efficacy of various IOL calculations for this unique patient group. Currently, research on this surgical topic is limited. Methods: In this retrospective study, 11 eyes from 7 individuals with a history of RK and LASIK who underwent cataract surgery at Hoopes Vision were analyzed. Preoperative biometric and corneal topographic measurements were performed. Subjective refraction was obtained postoperatively. Twelve different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations were used: Barrett True K No History, Barrett True K (prior LASIK, Prior RK history), Barrett Universal 2, Camellin-Calossi-Camellin (3C), Double K-Modified Holladay, Haigis-L, Galilei, OCT, PEARL-DGS, Potvin-Hill, Panacea, and Shammas. Results: The rankings of mean arithmetic error (MAE), from least to greatest, were as follows: 3C (0.088), Haigis-L-L (-0.508), Shammas (-0.516), OCT Average (-0.538), Barrett True K (-0.557), OCT RK (-0.563), Galilei (-0.570), IOL Master (-0.571), OCT LASIK (-0.583), Barrett True K No History (-0.597), Pearl-DGS (-0.606), Potvin-Hill SF (-0.770), Potvin-Hill TNP (-0.778), Panacea (-0.876), and Barrett Universal 2 (-1.522). The 3C formula achieved the greatest percentage of eyes within ±0.25 D of target range (91%), while Haigis-L, Shammas, Galilei, Potvin Hill, Barrett True K, IOL Master, PEARL-DGS, and OCT formulae performed similarly, achieving 45% of eyes within ±0.75D of target refraction. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the accuracy of the lesser known 3C formula in IOL calculation, particularly for patients who have undergone both RK and LASIK. Well-known formulae, such as Haigis-L, Shammas, and Galilei, which are used by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS), are viable options, although 3C formulae should be considered in this patient population. Furthermore, larger studies can confirm the best IOL power formulas for post-RK and LASIK cataract patients.

Merging PRK and Collagen Crosslinking: An Analysis of Literature and a Guide to Prevalent Protocols.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to summarize the different surgical approaches combining photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and corneal crosslinking (CXL), present each protocol template in a simple format, and provide an overview of the primary outcomes and adverse events. METHODS: A literature review was conducted as outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Eight different databases were searched. Papers were included if PRK was immediately followed by CXL. RESULTS: Thirty-seven papers met the inclusion criteria of a total yield of 823. The latest research into simultaneous PRK and CXL has been shown to not only stabilize the cornea and prevent keratoconus progression but also improve the visual acuity of the patient. Improvements in uncorrected distance visual acuity and (spectacle) corrected distance visual acuity were found to be significant when considering all protocols. There were also significant reductions in K1, K2, mean K, Kmax, sphere, cylinder, and spherical equivalent. Random-effects analysis confirmed these trends. Corrected distance visual acuity was found to improve by an average of 0.18 ± 1.49 logMAR (Cohen's D [CD] 0.12; P <0.02). There was also a significant reduction of 2.57 ± 0.45 D (CD 5.74; P <0.001) in Kmax. Cylinder and spherical equivalent were also reduced by 1.36 ± 0.26 D (CD 5.25; P <0.001) and 2.61 ± 0.38 D (CD 6.73; P <0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Combining the 2 procedures appears to be of net benefit, showing stabilization and improvement of ectatic disease, while also providing modest gains in visual acuity. Since customized PRK and CXL approaches appear superior, a combination of these would likely be best for patients.

AvaGen Genetic Testing versus Ocular Screening Assessments Including the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS) and Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System (ERSS) in Refractive Surgery Candidates.

Purpose: To determine whether the AvaGen (AG) Genetic Eye Test provided additional information for screening for the presence of keratoconus (KC) and assessing KC risk in refractive surgery candidates, as compared to the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS) and Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System (ERSS). Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients seeking refractive surgery at an eye clinic in the United States between January 2022 and July 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed those with a family history of KC, positive KC indices, or both. Corneal evaluations and demographic information were recorded and analyzed. KSS and ERSS criteria were utilized to evaluate postoperative KC and ectasia risk, respectively. Patients were categorized on how the AG genetic test compared to KSS and ERSS criteria. Clinicians assessed topographic indices, criteria scoring, and AG testing to deliver a definitive surgical recommendation. Results: Among the 19 patients evaluated for ectasia risk, AG testing showed lower KC risk than ocular screening in three patients (15.8%), equal risk in three patients (15.8%), and higher risk in 13 patients (68.4%). The mean AG scores were 45.7 ± 7.0, 49.0 ± 3.46, and 61 ± 13.0 for these respective categories. The most frequently identified KC risk genes were ADAMTS18, COL2A1, and COL4A1. The AG test modified the physician's recommendation for refractive surgery in nine cases (47.4%). Conclusion: Despite the promising application of AG testing for assessing KC risk, further research and development are needed to enhance its applicability for screening refractive surgery candidates, in addition to standard ocular screening approaches.

Changes in Posterior Cornea and Posterior-To-Anterior Curvature Radii Ratio 1 Year After LASIK, PRK, and SMILE Treatment of Myopia.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare changes in the posterior curvature and the posterior-anterior radii ratio of the cornea, 1 year postoperatively in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). METHODS: This retrospective study was performed at a single surgical center. 199 eyes were included in the study from 119 patients with manifest refraction spherical equivalents from -7.61 to -2.54 D. 67 eyes underwent LASIK, 89 underwent PRK, and 43 underwent SMILE. Both preoperative and 1-year postoperative front and back sagittal keratometry were measured at 4- to 6-mm zones around the corneal vertex. Corneal asphericity (Q-value) was measured at an 8-mm zone around the corneal vertex. RESULTS: The average change in the posterior-anterior radii ratio after LASIK, PRK, and SMILE did not differ between surgery groups at 4 mm (LASIK: -0.075, PRK: -0.073, SMILE: -0.072, P = 0.720), 5 mm (LASIK: -0.072, PRK: -0.068, SMILE: -0.068, P = 0.531), or 6 mm (LASIK: -0.075, PRK: -0.071, SMILE: -0.072, P = 0.456) zones. Anterior Q-value significantly positively increased after all 3 surgeries ( P < 0.001). The posterior Q-value also significantly positively increased after LASIK ( P < 0.001) and SMILE ( P < 0.001), but not after PRK ( P = 0.227). Both anterior and posterior keratometric power decreased significantly after LASIK, PRK, and SMILE for all diameters. CONCLUSIONS: The change in the posterior-anterior radii ratio was not influenced by the type of refractive surgery performed, as indicated by statistically identical preoperative, postoperative, and delta values. In addition, the posterior cornea exhibited paracentral flattening after LASIK, SMILE, and PRK and increased oblateness after LASIK and SMILE.

Predictability of Existing IOL Formulas After Cataract Surgery in Patients with a Previous History of Radial Keratotomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of 12 different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for post-radial keratotomy (RK) eyes. The investigation utilizes recent advances in topography/tomography devices and artificial intelligence (AI)-based calculators, comparing the results to those reported in current literature to assess the efficacy and predictability of IOL calculations for this patient group. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 37 eyes from 24 individuals with a history of RK who underwent cataract surgery at Hoopes Vision Center were analyzed. Biometry and corneal topography measurements were taken preoperatively. Subjective refraction was obtained 6 months postoperatively. Twelve different IOL power calculations were used, including the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) post-RK online formula, and the Barrett True K, Double K modified-Holladay 1, Haigis-L, Panacea, Camellin-Calossi, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, Kane, and Prediction Enhanced by Artificial Intelligence and output Linearization-Debellemanière, Gatinel, and Saad (PEARL-DGS) formulas. Outcome measures included median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error (MAE), arithmetic mean error (AME), and percentage of eyes achieving refractive prediction errors (RPE) within ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D, and ± 1 D for each formula. A search of the literature was also performed by two independent reviewers based on relevant formulas. RESULTS: Overall, the best performing IOL power calculations were the Camellin-Calossi (MedAE = 0.515 D), the ASCRS average (MedAE = 0.535 D), and the EVO (MedAE = 0.545 D) and Kane (MedAE = 0.555 D) AI-based formulas. The EVO and Kane formulas along with the ASCRS calculation performed similarly, with 48.65% of eyes scoring within ± 0.50 D of the target range, while the Equivalent Keratometry Reading (EKR) 65 Holladay formula achieved the greatest percentage of eyes scoring within ± 0.25 D of the target range (35.14%). Additionally, the EVO 2.0 formula achieved 64.86% of eyes scoring within the ± 0.75 D RPE category, while the Kane formula achieved 75.68% of eyes scoring within the ± 1 D RPE category. There was no significant difference in MAE between the established and newer generation formulas (P > 0.05). The Panacea formula consistently underperformed when compared to the ASCRS average and other high-performing formulas (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential of AI-based IOL calculation formulas, such as EVO 2.0 and Kane, for improving the accuracy of IOL power calculation in post-RK eyes undergoing cataract surgery. Established calculations, such as the ASCRS and Barrett True K formula, remain effective options, while under-utilized formulas, like the EKR65 and Camellin-Calossi formulas, show promise, emphasizing the need for further research and larger studies to validate and enhance IOL power calculation for this patient group.

Implication of Corneal Refractive Surgery in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is an X-linked disorder due to a dystrophin mutation and is the leading cause of muscular dystrophy. DMD presents with characteristic systemic effects, including severe muscular atrophy, cardiomyopathy, and ocular manifestations. Performing corneal refractive surgeries in patients with DMD raises concerns regarding patient positioning, risk of cataracts, and other comorbid conditions. Published reports of photorefractive keratectomy, laser-assisted in situ keratomileuses, and small incision lenticule extraction are lacking in this population. Here, we discuss a patient being evaluated for a corneal refractive surgery. This article also discusses the current understanding of DMD, known ocular manifestations, and factors to consider when evaluating a patient for potential corrective vision laser surgery.

Comparative Analysis of Corneal Higher-Order Aberrations after Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis, Photorefractive Keratectomy, and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction with Correlations to Change in Myopic Q-Value and Spherical Equivalent with and without Astigmatism.

Background: This retrospective chart review compared the higher-order aberrations (HOAs) among photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) alongside changes in spherical equivalent (SEQ) and corneal shape (Q-value). Methods: Analyzing 371 myopic eyes, including 154 LASIK, 173 PRK, and 44 SMILE cases, Pentacam imaging was utilized pre-operatively and at one-year post-operative visits. Results: All procedures resulted in 100% of patients achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/40 or better, with 87% of LASIK and PRK, and 91% of SMILE patients having 20/20 or better. Significant increases in HOAs were observed across all procedures (p < 0.05), correlating positively with SEQ and Q-value changes (LASIK (0.686, p < 0.05), followed by PRK (0.4503, p < 0.05), and SMILE (0.386, p < 0.05)). Vertical coma and spherical aberration (SA) were the primary factors for heightened aberration magnitude among the procedures (p < 0.05), with the largest contribution in SMILE, which is likely attributed to the centration at the corneal apex. Notably, PRK showed insignificant changes in vertical coma (-0.197 µm ± 0.0168 to -0.192 µm ± 0.0198, p = 0.78), with an increase in oblique trefoil (p < 0.05). Conclusions: These findings underscore differences in HOAs among PRK, LASIK, and SMILE, helping to guide clinicians.

Keratoconus: exploring fundamentals and future perspectives - a comprehensive systematic review.

Background: New developments in artificial intelligence, particularly with promising results in early detection and management of keratoconus, have favorably altered the natural history of the disease over the last few decades. Features of artificial intelligence in different machine such as anterior segment optical coherence tomography, and femtosecond laser technique have improved safety, precision, effectiveness, and predictability of treatment modalities of keratoconus (from contact lenses to keratoplasty techniques). These options ingrained in artificial intelligence are already underway and allow ophthalmologist to approach disease in the most non-invasive way. Objectives: This study comprehensively describes all of the treatment modalities of keratoconus considering machine learning strategies. Design: A multidimensional comprehensive systematic narrative review. Data sources and methods: A comprehensive search was done in the five main electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane), without language and time or type of study restrictions. Afterward, eligible articles were selected by screening the titles and abstracts based on main mesh keywords. For potentially eligible articles, the full text was also reviewed. Results: Artificial intelligence demonstrates promise in keratoconus diagnosis and clinical management, spanning early detection (especially in subclinical cases), preoperative screening, postoperative ectasia prediction after keratorefractive surgery, and guiding surgical decisions. The majority of studies employed a solitary machine learning algorithm, whereas minor studies assessed multiple algorithms that evaluated the association of various keratoconus staging and management strategies. Last but not least, AI has proven effective in guiding the implantation of intracorneal ring segments in keratoconus corneas and predicting surgical outcomes. Conclusion: The efficient and widespread clinical translation of machine learning models in keratoconus management is a crucial goal of potential future approaches to better visual performance in keratoconus patients. Trial registration: The article has been registered through PROSPERO, an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews, with the ID: CRD42022319338.

Keratoconus: from fundamentals to future Artificial intelligence has changed how we treat the eye disease keratoconus in recent years. This study examines the many keratoconus therapies available, including surgery and contact lens wear, and how artificial intelligence can improve the safety and accuracy of these procedures. We combed through numerous papers to locate this data. To achieve the best outcomes, several parameters and methods should be evaluated. According to the study, some elements from eye scans are more useful than others. The idea behind using artificial intelligence is to help patients see better and treat keratoconus more effectively.

Correlational Analysis of the Effective Optical Zone with Myopia, Myopic Astigmatism, and Spherical Equivalent in LASIK, PRK, and SMILE.

Purpose: We assess the relationship between preoperative myopic sphere, astigmatism, and spherical equivalent and effective optical zone (EOZ) size, shape, and decentration within individual populations of post-LASIK, PRK, and SMILE patients. Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted with 118 LASIK, 144 PRK, and 41 SMILE eyes from 179 total patients that underwent compound myopic ablation. One-year postoperative Pentacam tangential difference maps were used for EOZ data measurements. Correlational analysis between compound myopic measures [sphere, cylinder, manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE)] and EOZ parameters was performed, and differences between groups of myopic sphere and cylinder within each surgery type were assessed. Results: An increase in absolute myopic sphere (and subsequent MRSE) is associated with a smaller EOZ area in SMILE (r=0.454, p=0.003) and a more circular EOZ shape in LASIK (r=0.396, p<0.001) and PRK (r=0.563, p<0.001). An increase in absolute myopic cylinder is associated with an increased EOZ area in all three surgery types [LASIK (r=-0.459, p<0.001), PRK (r=-0.716, p<0.001), SMILE (r=-0.429, p=0.005)] and a more elliptical EOZ in LASIK (r=-0.491, p<0.001) and PRK (r=-0.538, p<0.001). Conclusion: While astigmatism may be correlated to EOZ size within all three refractive surgery types, myopic sphere alone is insufficient to estimate EOZ size differences for procedures with a large blend zone of ablation like LASIK or PRK. Shape is just as important a factor as size to consider when examining corneal EOZ differences; reported correlative findings likely result from inherent differences in surgical technique and abruptness of planned surgical ablation borders.

Comparative evaluation of multiple nomograms for predicting postoperative vault after implantable collamer lens surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the vault predictability of most available implantable collamer lens (ICL) sizing nomograms and identify which preoperative measurements are predictive of vault. SETTING: Private practice in Draper, Utah. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 209 eyes of 106 patients who underwent STAAR Surgical ICL implantation. Analyses were performed based on the availability of preoperative parameters, varying the number of eyes for each test. Mean absolute error (MAE) of predicted vs actual postoperative vault was calculated for each nomogram. The frequency of Kim, Rocamora (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-optical coherence tomography), Russo, and Reinstein recommending the correct ICL size in instances when Parkhurst, optimized white-to-white (WTW), and STAAR could not recommend a definitive ICL size was determined. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis was performed between preoperative measurements and vault. RESULTS: The Kim, Rocamora, Russo, and Reinstein nomograms had significantly lower MAE of predicted vs actual postoperative vault than the KSV2 and Nakamura V3 nomograms. The Russo formula most frequently recommended the correct ICL size when the Parkhurst, Optimized WTW, and STAAR nomograms could not provide ICL size recommendations. At the 0.05 significance level, anterior chamber depth (ACD), ciliary body inner diameter (CBID), and pupil diameter were the parameters found to have significant correlation with postoperative vault. CONCLUSIONS: The Kim, Rocamora, Russo, and Reinstein nomograms were the most predictive of vault. Additionally, ACD, CBID, and pupil diameter were found to be significantly correlated with vault and should be considered for use in future ICL sizing nomograms.

Association of Patient Satisfaction with Cataract Grading in Five Types of Multifocal IOLs.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated patient satisfaction levels in five premium intraocular lenses (IOLs). A secondary aim was to determine whether patient satisfaction was associated with the cataract grade before lens surgery. METHODS: In this multicenter prospective comparative study, 164 patients from diverse backgrounds underwent cataract surgery and were assigned for identical bilateral implantation of multifocal IOLs. In addition to visual performance, quality of life was measured using the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality Of Life Instrument (NEI-RQL 42) scoring questionnaire. The Sirius Scheimpflug Analyzer was used to evaluate the posterior cornea and aberrations. Finally, the association of patient satisfaction reports with the Pentacam Cataract Grading Scale (PCGS) and Lens Opacities Classification System (LOCS III) was evaluated. RESULTS: A considerable subjective improvement was observed in uncorrected far, near (40 cm), and intermediate (60 cm) visual acuity in the five groups (P values < 0.001). A significant difference was observed in mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity between Symfony, Trinova, and AT LISA at the spatial frequency of 12 cycles per degree, favoring Symfony (P < 0.001). PanOptix users had considerably lower mean coma values (P < 0.001), while AT LISA users had lower mean spherical aberrations (P = 0.009) compared to the other groups. No additional safety concerns relating to IOLs were recorded. Mean satisfaction had a high correlation with LOCS and Pentacam Nuclear Staging (PNS) in each lens group, e.g., correlation coefficient and P value for AT LISA were respectively r = 0.99, P < 0.001 and r = 0.97, P = 0.004. CONCLUSION: Despite discrepancies between groups of lenses, most patients who received multifocal IOLs reported satisfaction at more than 3 years after the initial operation. A growing number of patients with cataracts are seeking spectacle-free vision with presbyopia-correcting IOLs. Hence, the high satisfaction rate among patients with cataract could indicate the value of offering a wider range of available lenses.

Comparing Effective Optical Zones After Myopic Ablation Between LASIK, PRK, and SMILE With Correlation to Higher Order Aberrations.

PURPOSE: To explore size, decentration, and eccentricity of effective optical zones (EOZs) in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and correlate them to higher order aberrations (HOAs). METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 188 eyes that underwent refractive surgery for compound myopia (61 LASIK, 84 PRK, 43 SMILE). EOZ measurements were determined using 1-year postoperative Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) tangential difference maps. HOA data were measured using Pentacam wavefront aberration Zernike polynomials. Correlations between EOZs and HOAs were analyzed. RESULTS: The EOZs of LASIK and PRK are smaller than SMILE at 19.54 ± 1.44, 19.39 ± 1.66, and 22.18 ± 2.61 mm2, respectively (P < .001). No difference existed in absolute decentration from corneal vertex (P = .078) or pupil center (P = .131), but horizontal and vertical components differed significantly (P < .001). Smaller EOZ areas were correlated with greater spherical aberration induction (rLASIK = -0.378, rPRK = -0.555, rSMILE = -0.501) and total HOA induction in all groups. Absolute decentration from corneal vertex positively correlated with total HOA (rLASIK = 0.396, rPRK = 0.463, rSMILE = 0.399) and directional vertical coma induction negatively correlated with vertical decentration from the corneal vertex (rLASIK = -0.776, rPRK = -0.665, rSMILE = -0.576) in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: SMILE results in a larger EOZ than LASIK and PRK, and absolute decentration remains comparable regardless of surgical reference center, despite horizontal/vertical differences. Surgical planning to ensure adequate EOZ size and centration may reduce induction of HOAs, including spherical aberrations and vertical coma. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(11):741-750.].

Exploring Nomograms for Implantable Collamer Lens Size Selection in Myopia: A Literature-based Compilation.

Purpose: To provide a comprehensive guide of all implantable collamer lens (ICL) sizing nomograms and the respective preoperative diagnostic devices that are required. This guide would help clinicians in choosing the appropriate ICL size for myopic patients to optimize postoperative vault height. Methods: A literature search of peer-reviewed journals describing methods and postoperative outcomes of ICL sizing was conducted. Research articles containing ICL nomograms or formulas were identified from this search. Preoperative variables necessary for these nomograms and the required diagnostic devices to measure these parameters such as topography, biometry, or ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) were noted. An additional search was conducted to identify artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML)-derived nomograms. Results: Eighteen ICL sizing nomograms were identified through literature search. Five of these nomograms are available for use and require topography or biometry devices. Of these, four include the manufacturer's, optimized white-to-white (WTW), Kang, Kim, and Rocamora Nomograms. Eight of the 18 nomograms available for use require UBM. Eight of these include the Kojima, Nakamura, KS, ZZ, Dougherty, Parkhurst, Russo, and Reinstein Nomograms. Four of the 18 nomograms are ML-derived including Shen, Rocamora, Russo, and Kang Nomograms. Conclusion: ICL nomograms are a vital tool in helping clinicians select the right ICL size for myopic patients to optimize postoperative vault reducing risk of postoperative complications. Based on available diagnostic devices such as topography, biometry, or UBM clinicians can integrate specific nomograms into practice.

Central corneal distortion after small-incision lenticule extraction.

A 33-year-old woman with a prior history of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) presented with gradual deterioration of vision in her right eye since the surgery. She had undergone bilateral SMILE for myopic correction (-7.00 diopters [D] in the right eye and -6.00 D in the left eye) 3 weeks prior. SMILE was performed with a Zeiss VisuMax femtosecond laser system, with a cap thickness of 120 µm, a cap diameter of 7.50 mm, and a lenticule diameter of 6.50 mm. At the completion of the surgery, loose epithelium was noted at the SMILE incision bilaterally, and bandage contact lenses were placed in both eyes. On the first postoperative day, the patient's uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 20/40 in both eyes. The bandage lenses were removed from both eyes, with the epithelium intact. At the first-week postoperative visit, her visual acuity was recorded as 20/30 in the right eye and 20/20 in the left eye. She noticed her vision in the right eye was not as sharp as that in her left eye. She denied experiencing any pain, redness, or ocular surface irritations. She was advised to return to the clinic for a 1-month postoperative visit and continue with aggressive lubrication in both eyes. However, a week later, the patient returned for an emergency visit, citing significant central visual distortion in the right eye and difficulty working on the computer. At this visit, her UDVA and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 20/50 in the right eye and 20/15 in the left eye at both near and far distances. A slitlamp examination revealed mild central changes in the right eye. She once again denied any pain, redness, or irritation. She was advised to continue with artificial tears and return to the office in 1 week for further observation of the central distortion in her right eye. Upon returning to the clinic at the third postoperative week, the patient still complained of central visual changes in the right eye, with a visual acuity of 20/70. Further slitlamp examination revealed a nonspecific central haze in the same eye, but there was no corneal staining or signs of epithelial defects. Anterior segment ocular coherence tomography (AS-OCT) and NIDEK topography were performed, showing the same central distortion in the right eye (Figures 1 and 2JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202311000-00016/figure1/v/2023-10-18T004638Z/r/image-tiffJOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202311000-00016/figure2/v/2023-10-18T004638Z/r/image-tiff). Based on the examination and images provided, what is your working medical diagnosis? What other medical conditions are in your differential diagnosis? What medical and/or surgical interventions would you recommend, if any?