Dataset Information

Matched population comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction between 3 modalities for the correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To compare toric implantable collamer lens (T-ICL), femto-LASIK, and ReLEx SMILE for the treatment of low to moderate myopic astigmatism in terms of long-term visual and refractive outcomes and predictability of astigmatic correction.

Materials and methods

The study included 30 eyes from 30 patients between the age groups of 21 and 40 years, undergoing bilateral surgery with any of the three procedures - T-ICL, femto-LASIK, or ReLEx SMILE - for correction of myopic astigmatism within the range of -3 to -8 D spherical equivalent (SE), with a minimum astigmatism of -0.75 D. Patients were followed up at day 1, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year.

Results

At 1 year, the mean cylinder reduced to -0.21±0.28, -0.17±0.36, and -0.22±0.28 D in the T-ICL, femto-LASIK, and ReLEx SMILE group, respectively. The predictability of astigmatism correction was comparable, with no statistically significant difference between the 3 groups (P>0.05). A total of 97% of eyes in ReLEx SMILE achieved a uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, compared to T-ICL (93%) and FS-LASIK (90%). However, gain in lines of corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA) was maximum in T-ICL group (60%). Four eyes in the femto-LASIK group had loss of CDVA by one line. Three eyes required exchange due to high vault and rotation of the T-ICL, which did not affect the final outcome.

Conclusion

All 3 modalities were effective for myopic astigmatism at the end of 1 year. Quality of vision and patient satisfaction with T-ICL and ReLEx SMILE were similar and better than FS-LASIK. However, slight chances of postoperative rotation and exchange exist with T-ICL, which warrant thorough preoperative planning.

SUBMITTER: Ganesh S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5505606 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Matched population comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction between 3 modalities for the correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism.

Ganesh Sri S Brar Sheetal S Pawar Archana A

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 20170703

<h4>Purpose</h4>To compare toric implantable collamer lens (T-ICL), femto-LASIK, and ReLEx SMILE for the treatment of low to moderate myopic astigmatism in terms of long-term visual and refractive outcomes and predictability of astigmatic correction.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>The study included 30 eyes from 30 patients between the age groups of 21 and 40 years, undergoing bilateral surgery with any of the three procedures - T-ICL, femto-LASIK, or ReLEx SMILE - for correction of myopic astigma ...[more]

PMID: 28740361

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAstigmatism correction after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery is affected by several factors, including ocular residual astigmatism (ORA), which accounts for the vector difference between refractive and corneal astigmatism. Previous studies revealed the relationship between ORA and astigmatism correction after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). However, in SMILE surgery, no comprehensive study exploring the link between these two variables has been performed. We have therefore assessed the association between ORA and astigmatism correction after SMILE.MethodsThis was a retrospective, single-centered study. Patients with myopia or myopic astigmatism who underwent SMILE surgery using the 500-kHz Visumax laser platform and were followed up for at least 3 months were included. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, such as visual acuity, refractive status and corneal tomography, were recorded. ORA was calculated using Alpins Statistical System for Ophthalmic Refractive Surgery Techniques (ASSORT) Ocular Residual Astigmatism calculator.ResultsA total of 888 eyes (408 eyes from males and 480 eyes from females) from 444 patients (mean age [standard deviation] 32.4 ± 7.1 years) were included in our study. Mean (± SD) preoperative sphere and cylinder were - 5.45 ± 1.98 (range - 10.00-0.00) diopter (D) and - 0.89 ± 0.70 (range - 4.00-0.00) D, respectively. Calculated mean ORA was 0.68 ± 0.35 (range 0.07-3.53) D. Postoperative logMAR uncorrected visual acuity was 0.03 ± 0.31. Mean postoperative sphere and cylinder were - 0.10 ± 0.56 (range - 1.5 to 1.0) D and - 0.51 ± 0.37 (- 1.5 to 0.0) D, respectively. The Pearson correlation test revealed preoperative sphere, steep keratometry (steep-K) and ORA were statistically correlated with the amplitude of astigmatism correction (P < 0.001), and the generalized estimating equations analysis showed that ORA was negatively correlated with the amplitude of astigmatism correction (P < 0.001).ConclusionThe results of our study suggest that preoperative higher ORA may be associated with a lower magnitude of astigmatism correction after SMILE surgery in patients with all levels of astigmatism preoperative.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05604872. Registered 3 November 2022-Retrospectively registered. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05604872.

Project description:PurposeTo determine whether intraoperative aberrometry during cataract surgery measures higher levels of absolute astigmatism than preoperative biometry readings and which method yields a lower, final level of astigmatism if the two do not agree.Patients and methodsRetrospective record review of all patients who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery from February 2015 to May 2019 with planned intraoperative aberrometry. Data analysis included preoperative keratometry, total astigmatism as measured by intraoperative aberrometry, intraocular lens model and power used, and postoperative manifest refraction ≥1 month after surgery. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients requiring astigmatism correction (≥0.5 D) when measured by preoperative keratometry vs intraoperative aberrometry. Secondary outcomes included postoperative residual astigmatism, where adjusted preoperative astigmatism fell below the 0.5 D threshold for treatment but the intraoperative measurement was ≥0.5 D or ≥1.0 D.ResultsA total of 451 patient records were evaluated. Intraoperative aberrometry measured statistically higher levels of mean astigmatism than keratometry (0.86 D vs 0.79 D, respectively; P < 0.0001) and significantly greater astigmatism among patients with 0.5-1.5 D of adjusted preoperative astigmatism (P < 0.0001). Significantly more patients qualified for with-the-rule astigmatism correction when measured by intraoperative aberrometry (n=339; 75%) than by preoperative keratometry alone (n=314; 70%); P < 0.03. This difference did not hold for against-the-rule or oblique astigmatism. For patients whose preoperative biometry astigmatism differed from intraoperative biometry, final postoperative astigmatism was lower when corrected if the adjusted preoperative and intraoperative measurements had a vector difference of <0.5 D, but there was no additional benefit in final astigmatism reduction when the vector difference was ≥0.5 D.ConclusionUsing intraoperative biometry readings can produce lower postoperative astigmatism than using preoperative biometry readings, but caution should be used when interpreting intraoperative readings that disagree with preoperative measurements with a vector magnitude of >0.5 D.

Dataset Information

Matched population comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction between 3 modalities for the correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism.

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Matched population comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction between 3 modalities for the correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets