Abstract
Introduction: A recent Cochrane review found no difference in visual acuity outcomes between femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and LASIK using mechanical microkeratomes (MMKs). This study compares the flap thickness and risk of complications related to flap creation using femtosecond lasers and MMKs. Methods: PubMed and the Web of Science are used to search the medical literature. An extensive search is performed to identify the flap thickness and complications of LASIK as reported up to 15 July 2021. The following keywords are used in various combinations: Corneal flap, femtosecond laser, laser in situ keratomileusis, laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis, LASIK, mechanical microkeratome. Results: After removing duplicates and irrelevant studies, 122 articles were included for review. Pooled differences for intended vs. postoperative flap thickness using MMKs and femtosecond laser were −4.07 μm (95% CI: −19.55, 3.24 μm) in studies on the MMK and 5.43 μm (95% CI: 2.30, 7.84 μm; p < 0.001), respectively. After removing the studies evaluating outcomes of the old generation Hansatome MMKs (which had a significantly greater variation of flap thickness), the pooled difference for newer MMKs was 4.97 μm (95% CI: 0.35, 9.58 μm; p < 0.001), but the results still favored the femtosecond laser. Uncommon and mild complications unique for the femtosecond LASIK are epithelial gas breakthrough, opaque bubble layer, transient light sensitivity syndrome, and rainbow glare. A single study reported a very low, but stastically different risk of postoperative flap slippage (0.033% for MMK LASIK, and 0.003% for femtosecond LASIK, respectively). Conclusion: In both manual microkeratome and femtosecond LASIK, intra- and postoperative complications were uncommon. The evidence of the superiority of one technique in terms of complications over another cannot be indisputably stated.
Highlights
A recent Cochrane review found no difference in visual acuity outcomes between femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and LASIK using mechanical microkeratomes (MMKs)
The following keywords were used in various combinations: Corneal flap, femtosecond laser, laser in situ keratomileusis, laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis, LASIK, mechanical microkeratome
One study comparing flap thickness between MMK and a femtosecond laser was a randomized controlled trial; in an investigation of eyes in 21 patients undergoing bilateral keratomileusis a flap was created with MMK in one eye, and with the femtosecond laser in the other eye [26]
Summary
A recent Cochrane review found no difference in visual acuity outcomes between femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and LASIK using mechanical microkeratomes (MMKs). Since introducing excimer lasers for refractive surgery, several million people have been successfully treated to decrease or eliminate their dependency on glasses or contact lenses to correct their ametropia [1]. Surface ablation procedures, such as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) and epi-LASIK, can be used very effectively to correct ametropia [2], and the risk for the development of keratectasia in uncompromised corneas is low [3]. Accuracy in corneal flap cutting is crucial for successful LASIK surgery
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have