American journal of ophthalmology · 2009
Correction of postkeratoplasty astigmatism by femtosecond laser compared with mechanized astigmatic keratotomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Hoffart Louis, Proust Helene, Matonti Frederic, Conrath John, Ridings Bernard
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of arcuate keratotomy (AK) performed with a femtosecond laser (FSL) or Hanna keratome (Moria, Anthony, France) for correction of postkeratoplasty astigmatism.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study.
METHODS: This clinical study included 20 eyes. Two groups of 10 eyes underwent AK using an FLS or keratome. Refractive and keratometric astigmatism were evaluated before surgery and 6 months after surgery. The astigmatic changes in the 2 groups were measured through arithmetic and vector analysis (Alpins method).
RESULTS: Six months after surgery, the mean uncorrected and corrected visual acuities did not change significantly. The mean preoperative refractive cylinder was 8.6 +/- 3.0 diopters (D) and 6.7 +/- 2.1 D, decreasing to 3.9 +/- 2.4 D and 4.7 +/- 2.4 D after laser AK and mechanized AK, respectively. The mean arithmetic change was significantly higher after laser AK, with a decrease of -55.4 +/- 20.7% (P = .011). Vector analysis showed a systematic undercorrection of astigmatism in both groups with a refractive correction index of 0.82 and 0.90 after laser AK and mechanized AK, respectively. Although no statistically significant differences were detected, a wider spread of angle of error and an almost significant difference of mean absolute angle of error (P = .052) suggest a larger misalignment of treatment during mechanized AK. All cases were uncomplicated after laser AK, 1 microperforation occurred and 1 case with off-center incisions occurred after mechanized AK.
CONCLUSIONS: AK performed with the femtosecond laser was effective in reducing postkeratoplasty astigmatism and has some advantages over conventional techniques. However, efficacy could be improved by a more accurate nomogram and alignment of treatment.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study.
METHODS: This clinical study included 20 eyes. Two groups of 10 eyes underwent AK using an FLS or keratome. Refractive and keratometric astigmatism were evaluated before surgery and 6 months after surgery. The astigmatic changes in the 2 groups were measured through arithmetic and vector analysis (Alpins method).
RESULTS: Six months after surgery, the mean uncorrected and corrected visual acuities did not change significantly. The mean preoperative refractive cylinder was 8.6 +/- 3.0 diopters (D) and 6.7 +/- 2.1 D, decreasing to 3.9 +/- 2.4 D and 4.7 +/- 2.4 D after laser AK and mechanized AK, respectively. The mean arithmetic change was significantly higher after laser AK, with a decrease of -55.4 +/- 20.7% (P = .011). Vector analysis showed a systematic undercorrection of astigmatism in both groups with a refractive correction index of 0.82 and 0.90 after laser AK and mechanized AK, respectively. Although no statistically significant differences were detected, a wider spread of angle of error and an almost significant difference of mean absolute angle of error (P = .052) suggest a larger misalignment of treatment during mechanized AK. All cases were uncomplicated after laser AK, 1 microperforation occurred and 1 case with off-center incisions occurred after mechanized AK.
CONCLUSIONS: AK performed with the femtosecond laser was effective in reducing postkeratoplasty astigmatism and has some advantages over conventional techniques. However, efficacy could be improved by a more accurate nomogram and alignment of treatment.