Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995) · 2014
Comparison of astigmatic correction after femtosecond lenticule extraction and wavefront-guided LASIK for myopic astigmatism.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Ali Mohamed A, Kobashi Hidenaga, Kamiya Kazutaka, Igarashi Akihito, Miyake Toshiyuki, Elewa Mohamed Ehab M, Komatsu Mari, Shimizu Kimiya
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare postoperative astigmatic correction between femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx) and wavefront-guided LASIK in eyes with myopic astigmatism.
METHODS: Fifty-eight eyes of 41 patients undergoing FLEx and 49 eyes of 29 patients undergoing wavefront-guided LASIK to correct myopic astigmatism were examined. Visual acuity, cylindrical refraction, predictability of the astigmatic correction, and astigmatic vector components were compared between groups 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in manifest cylindrical refraction (P = .08) or percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 diopter (D) of its refraction (P = .11) between the surgical procedures. The index of success in FLEx was statistically significantly better than that of wavefront-guided LASIK (P = .02), although there was no significant difference between the groups in other indices (eg, surgically induced astigmatism, target-induced astigmatism, astigmatic correction index, angle of error, difference vector, and flattening index). Subgroup analysis showed that FLEx had a better index of success (P = .02) and difference vector (P = .04) than wavefront-guided LASIK in the low cylinder subgroup; the angle of error in FLEx was significantly smaller than that of wavefront-guided LASIK in the moderate cylinder subgroup (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: Both FLEx and wavefront-guided LASIK worked well for the correction of myopic astigmatism by the 6-month follow-up visit. Although FLEx had a better index of success than wavefront-guided LASIK when using vector analysis, it appears equivalent to wavefront-guided LASIK in terms of visual acuity and the correction of astigmatism.
METHODS: Fifty-eight eyes of 41 patients undergoing FLEx and 49 eyes of 29 patients undergoing wavefront-guided LASIK to correct myopic astigmatism were examined. Visual acuity, cylindrical refraction, predictability of the astigmatic correction, and astigmatic vector components were compared between groups 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in manifest cylindrical refraction (P = .08) or percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 diopter (D) of its refraction (P = .11) between the surgical procedures. The index of success in FLEx was statistically significantly better than that of wavefront-guided LASIK (P = .02), although there was no significant difference between the groups in other indices (eg, surgically induced astigmatism, target-induced astigmatism, astigmatic correction index, angle of error, difference vector, and flattening index). Subgroup analysis showed that FLEx had a better index of success (P = .02) and difference vector (P = .04) than wavefront-guided LASIK in the low cylinder subgroup; the angle of error in FLEx was significantly smaller than that of wavefront-guided LASIK in the moderate cylinder subgroup (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: Both FLEx and wavefront-guided LASIK worked well for the correction of myopic astigmatism by the 6-month follow-up visit. Although FLEx had a better index of success than wavefront-guided LASIK when using vector analysis, it appears equivalent to wavefront-guided LASIK in terms of visual acuity and the correction of astigmatism.