Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
Cataract surgery astigmatism incisional management. Manual relaxing incision versus femtosecond laser-assisted arcuate keratotomy. A systematic review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
González-Cruces Timoteo, Cano-Ortiz Antonio, Sánchez-González María Carmen, Sánchez-González José-María
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This systematic review aims to compare corneal astigmatism correction in cataract surgery through corneal relaxing incision, manually and femtosecond laser assisted.
METHODS: The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We used PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WOS) as databases from January 2010 to March 30, 2021. Patients with keratoconus, corneal ectasia, and a previous history of eye surgery were excluded because our aim was to analyze only healthy eyes.
RESULTS: A total of 1025 eyes were evaluated from 946 patients (mean age was 68.90 ± 5.12) in manual incision group articles, while 1905 eyes of 1483 patients (mean age was 65.05 ± 4.57) were evaluated in femtosecond laser arcuate keratotomy (FLAK) articles. The mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.19 ± 0.12 and 0.15 ± 0.05 logMAR for manual incision and FLAK articles, respectively (p = 0.39). The mean correction index (CI) was similar in both groups: 0.77 ± 0.18 in manual incision and 0.79 ± 0.17 in femtosecond laser assisted incision (p = 0.70). Refractive stability was found after 3 months and no serious complications were reported during the follow-up in any group.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques are safe and moderately effective in corneal astigmatism correction in cataract surgery. FLAK represents a more precise and predictable approach. However, since visual and refractive outcomes appear to be similar in both cases, the cost-benefit analysis is controversial.
METHODS: The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We used PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WOS) as databases from January 2010 to March 30, 2021. Patients with keratoconus, corneal ectasia, and a previous history of eye surgery were excluded because our aim was to analyze only healthy eyes.
RESULTS: A total of 1025 eyes were evaluated from 946 patients (mean age was 68.90 ± 5.12) in manual incision group articles, while 1905 eyes of 1483 patients (mean age was 65.05 ± 4.57) were evaluated in femtosecond laser arcuate keratotomy (FLAK) articles. The mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.19 ± 0.12 and 0.15 ± 0.05 logMAR for manual incision and FLAK articles, respectively (p = 0.39). The mean correction index (CI) was similar in both groups: 0.77 ± 0.18 in manual incision and 0.79 ± 0.17 in femtosecond laser assisted incision (p = 0.70). Refractive stability was found after 3 months and no serious complications were reported during the follow-up in any group.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques are safe and moderately effective in corneal astigmatism correction in cataract surgery. FLAK represents a more precise and predictable approach. However, since visual and refractive outcomes appear to be similar in both cases, the cost-benefit analysis is controversial.