Effect of Prior Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis on the Calibration Accuracy of Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses: A Direct Comparative Study.

Background

Personalized precision medicine has become a prevailing trend and applies to the selection of intraocular lenses (IOLs) for cataract surgery based on the unique corneal morphology of each person. The choice of presbyopia-correcting IOLs for post-laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) cataract surgery is a significant concern. However, few direct comparison studies exist between eyes with and without LASIK history. We analyzed the performance of extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL implantation in these two groups.

Methods

In this retrospective single-center study, we included patients with or without previous LASIK who underwent cataract surgery and EDOF Symfony IOL implantation, with ≥1 follow up. All patients underwent optical biometry using the IOLMaster. IOL power was calculated using the Sanders Retzslaff Kraff/theoretical and Haigis-L formulas for patients without and with LASIK, respectively. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), refraction, and corneal tomography were recorded. The prediction error was the absolute difference between the postoperative sphere and target refraction. The right eyes of patients who met the inclusion criteria were selected for analysis.

Results

Among the 321 recruited eyes, 18 underwent previous LASIK. After 1:3 age/sex matching, 17 LASIK and 49 non-LASIK eyes from 66 patients were analyzed. No significant preoperative differences existed in target refraction, spherical equivalent, or best-corrected visual acuity. All surgical procedures were uneventful. LASIK exhibited non-inferiority to non-LASIK for predictive refraction error and UNVA. An age/sex-matched regression analysis indicated no UDVA superiority between the two groups.

Conclusions

Previous LASIK may have no discernible effect on the visual performance of presbyopia-correcting EDOF IOLs with respect to the absolute refractive error, UNVA, and UDVA. Longer follow-up and larger-scale studies are required to further validate these results.