Cargando…

Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

PURPOSE: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moshirfar, Majid, Shah, Tirth J, Skanchy, David Franklin, Linn, Steven H, Kang, Paul, Durrie, Daniel S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5221655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28115827
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S115270
_version_ 1782492859489845248
author Moshirfar, Majid
Shah, Tirth J
Skanchy, David Franklin
Linn, Steven H
Kang, Paul
Durrie, Daniel S
author_facet Moshirfar, Majid
Shah, Tirth J
Skanchy, David Franklin
Linn, Steven H
Kang, Paul
Durrie, Daniel S
author_sort Moshirfar, Majid
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data. METHODS: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. CONCLUSION: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5221655
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52216552017-01-23 Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz Moshirfar, Majid Shah, Tirth J Skanchy, David Franklin Linn, Steven H Kang, Paul Durrie, Daniel S Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data. METHODS: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. CONCLUSION: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery. Dove Medical Press 2017-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5221655/ /pubmed/28115827 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S115270 Text en © 2017 Moshirfar et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Moshirfar, Majid
Shah, Tirth J
Skanchy, David Franklin
Linn, Steven H
Kang, Paul
Durrie, Daniel S
Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_fullStr Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_short Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_sort comparison and analysis of fda reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for lasik: wavefront guided visx idesign, topography guided wavelight allegro contoura, and topography guided nidek ec-5000 catz
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5221655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28115827
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S115270
work_keys_str_mv AT moshirfarmajid comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT shahtirthj comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT skanchydavidfranklin comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT linnstevenh comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT kangpaul comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT durriedaniels comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz