Cargando…

Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT

BACKGROUND: This paper seeks to evaluate the depth and outcomes of MyoRing implantation using two mechanical dissection procedures including: PocketMaker microkeratome in opposition to the Melles hook method. METHODS: This retrospective study was carried out on 39 eyes of 38 keratoconus patients (28...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pirhadi, Shiva, Mohammadi, Neda, Mosavi, Seyed Aliasghar, Daryabari, Hashem, Aghamollaei, Hossein, Jadidi, Khosrow
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992749/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29879937
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-018-0806-2
_version_ 1783330093641236480
author Pirhadi, Shiva
Mohammadi, Neda
Mosavi, Seyed Aliasghar
Daryabari, Hashem
Aghamollaei, Hossein
Jadidi, Khosrow
author_facet Pirhadi, Shiva
Mohammadi, Neda
Mosavi, Seyed Aliasghar
Daryabari, Hashem
Aghamollaei, Hossein
Jadidi, Khosrow
author_sort Pirhadi, Shiva
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This paper seeks to evaluate the depth and outcomes of MyoRing implantation using two mechanical dissection procedures including: PocketMaker microkeratome in opposition to the Melles hook method. METHODS: This retrospective study was carried out on 39 eyes of 38 keratoconus patients (28 male and 10 female) with the mean age of [Formula: see text] years and had undergone MyoRing implantation by the two mentioned methods. The MyoRing was inserted into the corneal pocket which was made manually in 18 eyes (Melles hook group) or with PocketMaker microkeratome in 21 eyes (PocketMaker group). The mean follow up time was [Formula: see text] months with pre-operative and post-operative ophthalmic examination including uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), keratometry readings and central corneal thickness measurement. AS-OCT (Casia, SS-1000, Tomey, Nagoya, Japan) imaging was used to measure MyoRing insertion depth, exactly. RESULTS: Pre-operative and post-operative UCVA (LogMAR) mean change for the PocketMaker and Melles hook groups were recorded at 0.75 ± 0.32 and 0.78 ± 0.33, respectively. Similarly, BCVA (LogMAR) mean change were 0.27 ± 0.22 and 0.23 ± 0.22. Mean keratometry (Kmean) change were 6.06 ± 4.18 and 6.56 ± 3.55 respectively. UCVA change (P = 0.767), BCVA change (P = 0.77) and Kmean change (P = 0.693) showed that there was no statistically significant difference between both groups for any parameter. Depth measurements achieved from AS-OCT images showed that there was no statistically significant difference in pocket depth between two methods of MyoRing implantation (P = 0.413). CONCLUSIONS: The results of Myoring implantation outcomes using mechanical dissection via PocketMaker microkeratome as against Melles hook are comparable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5992749
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59927492018-06-21 Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT Pirhadi, Shiva Mohammadi, Neda Mosavi, Seyed Aliasghar Daryabari, Hashem Aghamollaei, Hossein Jadidi, Khosrow BMC Ophthalmol Research Article BACKGROUND: This paper seeks to evaluate the depth and outcomes of MyoRing implantation using two mechanical dissection procedures including: PocketMaker microkeratome in opposition to the Melles hook method. METHODS: This retrospective study was carried out on 39 eyes of 38 keratoconus patients (28 male and 10 female) with the mean age of [Formula: see text] years and had undergone MyoRing implantation by the two mentioned methods. The MyoRing was inserted into the corneal pocket which was made manually in 18 eyes (Melles hook group) or with PocketMaker microkeratome in 21 eyes (PocketMaker group). The mean follow up time was [Formula: see text] months with pre-operative and post-operative ophthalmic examination including uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), keratometry readings and central corneal thickness measurement. AS-OCT (Casia, SS-1000, Tomey, Nagoya, Japan) imaging was used to measure MyoRing insertion depth, exactly. RESULTS: Pre-operative and post-operative UCVA (LogMAR) mean change for the PocketMaker and Melles hook groups were recorded at 0.75 ± 0.32 and 0.78 ± 0.33, respectively. Similarly, BCVA (LogMAR) mean change were 0.27 ± 0.22 and 0.23 ± 0.22. Mean keratometry (Kmean) change were 6.06 ± 4.18 and 6.56 ± 3.55 respectively. UCVA change (P = 0.767), BCVA change (P = 0.77) and Kmean change (P = 0.693) showed that there was no statistically significant difference between both groups for any parameter. Depth measurements achieved from AS-OCT images showed that there was no statistically significant difference in pocket depth between two methods of MyoRing implantation (P = 0.413). CONCLUSIONS: The results of Myoring implantation outcomes using mechanical dissection via PocketMaker microkeratome as against Melles hook are comparable. BioMed Central 2018-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5992749/ /pubmed/29879937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-018-0806-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pirhadi, Shiva
Mohammadi, Neda
Mosavi, Seyed Aliasghar
Daryabari, Hashem
Aghamollaei, Hossein
Jadidi, Khosrow
Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title_full Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title_fullStr Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title_short Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT
title_sort comparison of the myoring implantation depth by mechanical dissection using pocketmaker microkeratome versus melles hook via as-oct
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992749/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29879937
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-018-0806-2
work_keys_str_mv AT pirhadishiva comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct
AT mohammadineda comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct
AT mosaviseyedaliasghar comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct
AT daryabarihashem comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct
AT aghamollaeihossein comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct
AT jadidikhosrow comparisonofthemyoringimplantationdepthbymechanicaldissectionusingpocketmakermicrokeratomeversusmelleshookviaasoct