Abstract
To compare visual acuity, refractive, wavefront, and visual quality outcomes between optimized prolate ablation (OPA) and optical path difference custom aspheric treatment (OPDCAT) algorithms for myopia correction. Private practice, Busan, South Korea. Prospective randomized masked clinical trial. One eye of each patient was randomly selected to have laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy with the OPA algorithm and the contralateral eye with the OPDCAT algorithm. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, ocular and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs), corneal asphericity (Q value), and modulation transfer function (MTF) in the 2 groups were compared 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. The study enrolled 39 patients. The mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent at 6 months was 0.19 diopter (D) ± 0.37 (SD) in the aspheric ablation group and 0.00 ± 0.33 D in the prolate ablation group. Predictability (± 0.50 D from intended refraction) at 6 months was 82% and 100%, respectively. Twenty-six eyes (93%) in the aspheric ablation group and 27 (96%) in the prolate ablation group had an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better. One eye in the aspheric ablation group and no eye in the prolate ablation group lost 1 line of corrected distance visual acuity. The prolate ablation group had fewer induced corneal and ocular spherical aberrations than the aspheric ablation group. Corneal asphericity was unchanged postoperatively in the prolate ablation group. The MTF under the correction of lower-order aberrations was higher in the prolate ablation group than in the aspheric ablation group. The prolate ablation algorithm gave more predictable visual outcomes, induced fewer corneal HOAs, and conserved more preoperative corneal asphericity than the aspheric algorithm. No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.