Dataset Information

Accuracy of Different Topographic Instruments in Calculating Corneal Power after Myopic Photorefractive Keratectomy.

ABSTRACT: To compare the corneal power measurements obtained using different topographic instruments after myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).Patients with myopia who were candidates for corneal refractive surgery were sequentially included. Pre-PRK and six months post-PRK corneal powers were measured using Javal manual keratometer, Orbscan II, Galilei, Tomey TMS4, and EyeSys 2000 topographers. Measured values were compared with those obtained using the clinical history method (CHM).This study included 66 eyes of 33 patients. The lowest keratometric measurements were obtained using the Galilei topographer (42.98 ± 1.69 diopters, D) and the highest measurements were obtained using the Javal manual keratometer (43.96 ± 1.54 D) preoperatively. The same order was observed postoperatively. Effective refractive power (EffRP) measured using EyeSys was most similar to the values obtained using CHM (ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.951), followed by the total corneal power measured using the Galilei system (ICC = 0.943). The values obtained using the adjusted EffRP formula (EffRP - 0.015*Δ Refraction - 0.05) were more consistent with the values obtained using CHM (ICC = 0.954) compared to those obtained with the adjusted average central corneal power formula measured using the Tomey system (ICC = 0.919).Post-PRK corneal powers measured using the adjusted EffRP formula were the most similar to values obtained using CHM.

SUBMITTER: Baradaran-Rafii A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5525492 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jul-Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose of the studyTo compare visual outcome, higher order aberrations (HOAs) of topography guided and Q value adjusted ablation in the fellow eye of patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.MethodsProspective randomized controlled interventional clinical study. The eyes of 52 patients undergoing PRK for myopia and astigmatism were included, that is, 104 eyes in total. In each patient, eyes were randomly allocated to group I: one eye received topography guided PRK using Contoura ablation software, or group II: the other eye received Q value adjusted PRK using Custom Q ablation software.Follow-upSix months.ResultsAt the end of 6 months, LogMAR UDVA was -0.04 ± 0.12 and -0.05 ± 0.11 (p = 0.688), while LogMAR CDVA was -0.06 ± 0.09 and -0.06 ± 0.1 in group I and group II, respectively (p = 0.972). Both groups showed a progressive oblate shift with time. This oblate shift was insignificantly less in group I by Topolyzer at 6mm, 15° and 30° at 6 months (p = 0.102, p = 0.138, p = 0.245, respectively). Topolyzer identified a significant difference between the change in coma and trefoil in both groups at 6 months (p<0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). This was caused by the significant worsening of coma in group II (p<0.001) and the significant improvement of trefoil in group I (p = 0.007). No significant difference was found between groups in the change of ISV or ABR (p = 0.955 and 0.982, respectively). Ablation depth is a significant predictor of ΔQ at 6mm, 15° and 30° (p = 0.009, 0.039 and 0, respectively). No significant difference was found in the Strehl ratio or contrast sensitivity, although they were insignificantly better in group I (p = 0.785 and p = 0.745, respectively).ConclusionTG PRK and CQ PRK yielded similar results regarding UDVA, CDVA, MRSE, safety, predictability and contrast sensitivity. Both groups showed a progressive oblate shift, which was less in the TG group but the difference was statistically insignificant. TG PRK showed significantly improved trefoil HOA as compared to CQ PRK.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of Different Topographic Instruments in Calculating Corneal Power after Myopic Photorefractive Keratectomy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure