Safety and Precision of Two Different Flap-morphologies Created During Low Energy Femtosecond Laser-assisted LASIK

PURPOSE: Currently, two major principles exist to create LASIK flaps: firstly, a strictly horizontal (2D) cut similar to the microkeratome-cut and secondly an angled cut with a “step-like” edge (3D). The strictly horizontal (2D) cut method can be performed using apparatus such as the low-energy FEMTO LDV Z8 laser and its predecessors which are specific to this type. Alternatively, the low-energy FEMTO LDV Z8 laser's 3D flap design creates an interlocking flap-interface surface which potentially contributes toward flap stability. In addition, the FEMTO LDV Z8 offers flap-position adjustments after docking (before flap-creation). The current study analyzed precision, safety, efficacy, as well as patient self-reported pain and comfort levels after applying two different types of LASIK flap morphologies which were created with a low-energy, high-frequency femtosecond (fs) laser device. METHODS: A prospective, interventional, randomized, contralateral eye, single-center comparison study was conducted from November 2019 to March 2020 at the Hamburg vision clinic/ zentrumsehstärke, Hamburg, Germany. Eleven patients and 22 eyes received low-energy fs LASIK treatment for myopia or myopic astigmatism in both eyes. Before the treatment, the eyes were randomized (one eye was treated with the 2D, the other eye with the 3D method). RESULTS: The mean central flap thickness one month after surgery was 110.7 [Formula: see text] 1.6 μm (2D) and 111.2 [Formula: see text] 1.7 μm (3D); P = 0.365 (2D vs 3D). Flap thickness measured at 13 different points resulted in no statistically significant differences between any of the measurement points within/between both groups; demonstrating good planarity of the flap was achieved using both methods. Despite not being statistically significant, the surgeons recognized an increase in the presence of an opaque bubble layer in the 3D flap eyes during surgery and some patients reported higher, yet not statistically significant, pain scores in the 3D flap eyes during the first hours after the treatment. Overall, safety- and efficacy indices were 1.03 and 1.03, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this prospective, randomized, contralateral eye study, the low-energy fs laser yielded predictable lamellar flap thicknesses and geometry at one-month follow-up. Based on these results, efficacy and safety of the corresponding laser application, that is, 2D vs 3D, are equivalent.