Cargando…
A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations
PURPOSE: To compare outcomes in visual acuity, refractive error, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, and dry eye in patients undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using wavefront (WF) guided VISX CustomVue and WF optimized WaveLight Allegretto platforms. METHODS: In this...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198407/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22034553 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S24316 |
_version_ | 1782214417814913024 |
---|---|
author | Moshirfar, Majid Betts, Brent S Churgin, Daniel S Hsu, Maylon Neuffer, Marcus Sikder, Shameema Church, Dane Mifflin, Mark D |
author_facet | Moshirfar, Majid Betts, Brent S Churgin, Daniel S Hsu, Maylon Neuffer, Marcus Sikder, Shameema Church, Dane Mifflin, Mark D |
author_sort | Moshirfar, Majid |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare outcomes in visual acuity, refractive error, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, and dry eye in patients undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using wavefront (WF) guided VISX CustomVue and WF optimized WaveLight Allegretto platforms. METHODS: In this randomized, prospective, single-masked, fellow eye study, LASIK was performed on 44 eyes (22 patients), with one eye randomized to WaveLight Allegretto, and the fellow eye receiving VISX CustomVue. Postoperative outcome measures at 3 months included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refractive error, root-mean-square (RMS) value of total and grouped HOAs, contrast sensitivity, and Schirmers testing. RESULTS: Mean values for UDVA (logMAR) were −0.067 ± 0.087 and −0.073 ± 0.092 in the WF optimized and WF guided groups, respectively (P = 0.909). UDVA of 20/20 or better was achieved in 91% of eyes undergoing LASIK with both lasers while UDVA of 20/15 or better was achieved in 64% of eyes using the Allegretto platform, and 59% of eyes using VISX CustomVue (P = 1.000). In the WF optimized group, total HOA increased 4% (P = 0.012), coma increased 11% (P = 0.065), and spherical aberration increased 19% (P = 0.214), while trefoil decreased 5% (P = 0.490). In the WF guided group, total HOA RMS decreased 9% (P = 0.126), coma decreased 18% (P = 0.144), spherical aberration decreased 27% (P = 0.713) and trefoil decreased 19% (P = 0.660). One patient lost one line of CDVA secondary to residual irregular astigmatism. CONCLUSION: Both the WaveLight Allegretto and the VISX CustomVue platforms had equal visual and safety outcomes. Most wavefront optimized HOA values trended upward, with a statistically significant increase in total HOA RMS. Eyes treated with the WF guided platform showed a decreasing trend in HOA values. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3198407 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31984072011-10-27 A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations Moshirfar, Majid Betts, Brent S Churgin, Daniel S Hsu, Maylon Neuffer, Marcus Sikder, Shameema Church, Dane Mifflin, Mark D Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To compare outcomes in visual acuity, refractive error, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, and dry eye in patients undergoing laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using wavefront (WF) guided VISX CustomVue and WF optimized WaveLight Allegretto platforms. METHODS: In this randomized, prospective, single-masked, fellow eye study, LASIK was performed on 44 eyes (22 patients), with one eye randomized to WaveLight Allegretto, and the fellow eye receiving VISX CustomVue. Postoperative outcome measures at 3 months included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refractive error, root-mean-square (RMS) value of total and grouped HOAs, contrast sensitivity, and Schirmers testing. RESULTS: Mean values for UDVA (logMAR) were −0.067 ± 0.087 and −0.073 ± 0.092 in the WF optimized and WF guided groups, respectively (P = 0.909). UDVA of 20/20 or better was achieved in 91% of eyes undergoing LASIK with both lasers while UDVA of 20/15 or better was achieved in 64% of eyes using the Allegretto platform, and 59% of eyes using VISX CustomVue (P = 1.000). In the WF optimized group, total HOA increased 4% (P = 0.012), coma increased 11% (P = 0.065), and spherical aberration increased 19% (P = 0.214), while trefoil decreased 5% (P = 0.490). In the WF guided group, total HOA RMS decreased 9% (P = 0.126), coma decreased 18% (P = 0.144), spherical aberration decreased 27% (P = 0.713) and trefoil decreased 19% (P = 0.660). One patient lost one line of CDVA secondary to residual irregular astigmatism. CONCLUSION: Both the WaveLight Allegretto and the VISX CustomVue platforms had equal visual and safety outcomes. Most wavefront optimized HOA values trended upward, with a statistically significant increase in total HOA RMS. Eyes treated with the WF guided platform showed a decreasing trend in HOA values. Dove Medical Press 2011 2011-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3198407/ /pubmed/22034553 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S24316 Text en © 2011 Moshirfar et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Moshirfar, Majid Betts, Brent S Churgin, Daniel S Hsu, Maylon Neuffer, Marcus Sikder, Shameema Church, Dane Mifflin, Mark D A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title | A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title_full | A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title_fullStr | A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title_full_unstemmed | A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title_short | A prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight(®) Allegretto Wave(®) Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVue™ STAR S4 IR™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
title_sort | prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of wavelight(®) allegretto wave(®) eye-q versus visx customvue™ star s4 ir™ in laser in situ keratomileusis (lasik): analysis of visual outcomes and higher order aberrations |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198407/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22034553 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S24316 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moshirfarmajid aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT bettsbrents aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT churgindaniels aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT hsumaylon aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT neuffermarcus aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT sikdershameema aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT churchdane aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT mifflinmarkd aprospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT moshirfarmajid prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT bettsbrents prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT churgindaniels prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT hsumaylon prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT neuffermarcus prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT sikdershameema prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT churchdane prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations AT mifflinmarkd prospectiverandomizedfelloweyecomparisonofwavelightallegrettowaveeyeqversusvisxcustomvuestars4irinlaserinsitukeratomileusislasikanalysisofvisualoutcomesandhigherorderaberrations |