1 / 12

M. Vokrojova MD, D. Sivekova MD, L. Wagnerova MD

COMPARISON OF POST-LASIK OUTCOMES WITH STANDARD EXCIMER PROCEDURE AND CUSTOM VUE PHOTOABLATION WITH IRIS REGISTRATION. M. Vokrojova MD, D. Sivekova MD, L. Wagnerova MD Prof. P. Kuchynka MD, PhD.

halima
Download Presentation

M. Vokrojova MD, D. Sivekova MD, L. Wagnerova MD

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COMPARISON OF POST-LASIK OUTCOMES WITH STANDARD EXCIMER PROCEDURE AND CUSTOM VUE PHOTOABLATION WITH IRIS REGISTRATION M. Vokrojova MD, D. Sivekova MD, L. Wagnerova MD Prof. P. Kuchynka MD, PhD The authors have no financial interest in the presentation material

  2. PURPOSE, OBJECTIVE To evaluate the difference in clinical outcomes between LASIK (VISX S4, AMO) patients treated with standard (conventional) excimer procedure and wavefront - guided procedure CustomVue with IRIS registration.

  3. Endpoints included Pre- and postoperative complete ophthalmic examination was done including UCVA, BCVA, manifest refraction, corneal topography, pachymetry (Pentacam, Oculus) and wavefront analysis (VISX WaveScan, AMO).

  4. Group A: 84 eyes Average Age : 24,7 y. Preop UNCA: 0,08 (0,01-0,2) Preop BSCVA: 1,0 Preop MRSE: -4,10 ±1,95 Surgical technique Moria M2 microkeratom (130 μm) Suction rings according keratometry nomograms Excimer laser: VISX S4 conventional procedure Group B: 40 eyes Average Age : 25,6 y. Preop UNCA: 0,03 (0,01-0,2) Preop BSCVA: 1,0 Preop MRSE: -4,55 ± 1,69 Surgical technique Moria M2 microkeratom (130 μm) Suction rings according keratometry nomograms Excimer laser: VISX S4 Custom Vue with IRIS registartion procedure MATERIALS, METHODS

  5. MATERIALS, METHODS

  6. RESULTSUNCVA/BCVA, Efficacy index Group A (n=84) Group B (n=40) Efficacy index:post.UCVA/preop.BCVA 1,05 ± 0,17 Efficacy index: post.UCVA/preop.BCVA 1,06 ± 0,18

  7. RESULTSWavefront analysis Pupil size : 6 mm p= 0,012

  8. RESULTSMRSE 6 month postop p= 0,36

  9. RESULTSPredictability scattergrams of attamted vs. achieved refraction, 6 month postop

  10. RESULTSRefractive outcome (MRSE) 6 month postop

  11. RESULTSStability of refraction

  12. CONCLUSION • Our results show that the Wavefront - guided procedure doesnot treat the current HOAs, but reduces the HOAs induced by excimer laser. • Results of Wavefront analysis show that the differences in postoperative HOAs in both groups is statistically significant (p=0,012). • The difference in the mean postoperative MRSE in both groups is not statistically significant (p=0,36).

More Related