Wavefront-optimized Laser In Situ Keratomileusis Research Articles

Low Contrast Acuity Outcomes After SMILE and LASIK.

To compare early visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) versus laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in terms of low contrast acuity. A secondary analysis was performed using a harmonized dataset derived from two completed prospective cohort studies on active-duty military service members undergoing either SMILE (n = 37), wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK (n = 51), or wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK (n = 56). Night vision and photopic and mesopic low contrast visual acuity (LCVA) up to 3 months postoperatively were compared between groups. Compared to SMILE-treated eyes, WFG LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better night vision and photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .016; beta = -0.043, P = .007, respectively). WFO LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .012) but had worse mesopic LCVA at 3 months postoperatively (beta = 0.033, P = .015) versus SMILE-treated eyes. SMILE and LASIK, on either a WFG or WFO laser platform, yielded excellent outcomes, but LCVA seemed to recover quicker following LASIK compared to SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(9):e667-e671.].

Comparison of Higher Order Aberrations between Wavefront Optimized Photorefractive Keratectomy and Laser in situ Keratomileusis in Myopic Patients.

To compare the higher order aberrations (HOA) between wavefront optimized (WFO) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in myopic patients. Quasi-experimental study. Place and Duration of the Study: Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, from December 2021 to December 2022. Forty-four patients underwent wavefront optimized PRK and fifty-seven patients underwent wavefront optimized LASIK. All variables were recorded before the procedure and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and included uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), root mean square (RMS) of HOAs, spherical aberration (SA), and coma aberration (CA). A total of 101 eyes of 51 patients were considered in the final analysis. Patients were divided into two groups. Group A comprised of 44 (43.6%) eyes of 22 patients who underwent PRK while group B comprised of 57 (56.4%) eyes of 29 patients who underwent LASIK. UCVA significantly improved postoperatively at 3 and 6 months in both PRK and LASIK groups (p<0.001 for both groups). In this study, the increase in root mean square (RMS) of higher order aberrations from baseline value was 77% after PRK and 28% after LASIK, similar ratio was observed in spherical aberration (SA). The trend of rise in Coma aberrations was more in LASIK group 66.49%as compared to 46.2% in PRK group. Both Wavefront Optimized PRK and LASIK are safe and have elicited comparable results of post-procedure visual recovery. There was a marked increase in RMS of HOAs in PRK group as compared to WFO LASIK group while coma aberration increased more in LASIK as compared to PRK postoperatively. LASIK, PRK, RMSh, HOAs, Spherical aberration, Coma, Myopia.

Higher-Order Aberrations of Topography-Guided LASIK and Wavefront-Optimized LASIK in High- and Low-Myopic Eyes: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial

We aimed to investigate high-order aberration (HOA) change between topography-guided (TG) and wavefront-optimized (WFO) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in patients with different degrees of myopia. A non-randomized clinical trial was conducted, in which 40 eyes of 20 patients aged 20-50 years old were included. Participants received TG-LASIK in one eye and WFO-LASIK on the alternate eye. Corneal topography and HOAs including coma, trefoil, spherical aberration (SA), and contrast sensitivity (CS) were collected. Moreover, a quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire was completed by each participant. Non-parametric tests were used to infer the difference in HOAs and CS between the TG-LASIK and WFO-LASIK groups, and subgroup analyses stratified by myopia degree were performed. The high-myopia patients with TG-LASIK showed more coma and SA compared to low-myopia individuals (all 95% CI lower limits > 0), and subjects who received WFO-LASIK exhibited more SA in high-myopia status (both 95% CI lower limits > 0). The TG-LASIK group showed lower postoperative trefoil compared to the WFO-LASIK group in the high-myopia population (mean difference: -0.1267, 95% CI: -0.24 to -0.01). The TG-LASIK group yielded less surgically induced haze, better clarity at night, and better total quality scores (all p < 0.05). In conclusion, TG-LASIK might yield less postoperative trefoil in high-myopia patients and higher QoV in the general population compared to the WFO-LASIK procedure.

Comparison of refractive and visual acuity results after Contoura® Vision topography-guided LASIK planned with the Phorcides Analytic Engine to results after wavefront-optimized LASIK in eyes with oblique astigmatism.

To compare visual acuity and refractive results between topography-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) planned with the Phorcides Analytic Engine (PAE) to results after wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK in subjects with preoperative oblique astigmatism in their manifest refraction. This was a retrospective chart review of clinical results from eyes treated with topography-guided LASIK planned with PAE compared to eyes treated with WFO LASIK using the same Wavelight® excimer laser system. All included subjects had preoperative oblique astigmatism. Residual refractive error and visual acuity (uncorrected and corrected) were the measures of interest, at the visit closest to 90 days postoperative. A matched data set from 100 WFO and 97 PAE eyes was extracted from clinical records. At the postoperative visit the PAE group showed lower residual refractive cylinder (p = 0.04), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) (-0.06 PAE vs. -0.02 WFO, p < 0.01) and distance corrected visual acuity (CDVA) (p < 0.01). The percentage of eyes with a mean refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) magnitude within 0.25 D and 0.50 D of plano was statistically significantly higher in the PAE group (p = 0.04 and 0.01, respectively). A statistically significantly higher percentage of eyes in the PAE group had UDVA better than or equal to -0.10 logMAR (20/16 Snellen, 36% vs 22%, p = 0.04). More eyes gained CDVA after surgery in the PAE group (53% vs 32%, p < 0.01). There were five enhancements in the WFO group versus none in the PAE group, a statistically significant difference (p = 0.03). Visual acuity and refractive outcomes after LASIK using PAE in eyes with oblique astigmatism in their preoperative refraction were statistically significantly better than those obtained when WFO treatment was used. The number of refractive outliers and the number of retreatments were also significantly lower with PAE treatment.

Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis.

Many studies have used functional optical zone (FOZ) as a measure to compare different refractive laser treatment modalities. However, to our knowledge, no study has compared wavefront- optimized (WFO) and wavefront-guided (WFG) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using FOZ. We compared the FOZ after WFO versus WFG LASIK in patients with myopia and myopic astigmatism. In this prospective comparative study, we included 100 myopic eyes of 50 patients with or without astigmatism. They were divided into two groups according to the platform used: WFO or WFG femtosecond LASIK. Using Holladay's equivalent keratometry reading (EKR) report of Pentacam HR, FOZ was defined as a zone centered on the pupil center with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.5 D, around the mean EKR. The differences in FOZ between the two platforms were analyzed at 3 months postoperatively. Visual acuity, refractive error, corneal asphericity (Q-value), and root mean square of higher-order aberrations (RMS for HOAs) were evaluated and compared. The mean (SD) of patient age was 26.64 (5.67) years. The preoperative characteristics of the two groups were comparable (all P > 0.05). The intended optical zone (IOZ) was 6 mm in both groups. The mean laser ablation depth was significantly greater in the WFG group (18 µm per D) than in the WFO group (16 µm per D) (P = 0.035). At 3 months postoperatively, the mean (SD) of FOZ diameter was 4.32 (0.94) mm (71.99% [15.68%] of intended optical zone) in the WFO group and 4.16 (1.13) mm (69.33% [18.78%] of intended optical zone) in the WFG group, with no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.622). The change in corneal asphericity was greater in the WFG group than in the WFO group (P = 0.034). Postoperative mean corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, and RMS for HOAs showed no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05). We found that WFG LASIK resulted in greater ablation depth and change in corneal asphericity than WFO LASIK at 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no significant difference in FOZ diameter, refractive error, and RMS for HOAs between the two groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Visual differences in topography-guided versus wavefront-optimized LASIK in the treatment of myopia: a Meta-analysis.

To investigate the potential differences between topography-guided (TG) and wavefront-optimized (WFO) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the treatment of myopia. A systematic literature search was performed to determine relevant trials comparing LASIK with TG and WFO from the time of library construction to August 2020, and The PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, EMBASE and Chinese databases (i.e. CNKI, CBM, WAN FANG and VIP) were accessed. The data on visual acuity, refractive status and wavefront aberration were retrieved and evaluated from three to six months after surgery. STATA (version 14.0) software was used for statistical analysis. A cumulative Meta-analysis was simultaneously performed. Eleven studies with a total of 1425 eyes were incorporated. No statistically significant differences were evident between TG and WFO ablation in the proportion of eyes achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better (P=0.377), gaining one line or more (P=0.05), postoperative cylinder (P=0.40), vertical coma (P=0.593) and horizontal coma (P=0.957). After TG ablation, the proportion of the patients' eyes of which postoperative refraction is within ±0.5 diopter of the target refraction was significantly higher than that undergoes WFO (P=0.003). As opposed to the WFO group, manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE; P=0.000) was lower, and UCVA (P=0.005) was better in the TG group. The higher-order aberrations (HOAs; P=0.000), spherical aberration (P=0.000) and coma (P=0.000) were significantly lower in TG group. The cumulative Meta-analysis illustrated that the proportion of eyes achieving UCVA of 20/20 or better, postoperative refraction within ±0.5 diopter, and MRSE has steady between the two groups. Both TG-LASIK and WFO-LASIK are safe, effective, and predictable for correcting myopia. TG-LASIK may produce fewer aberration and is more precise than WFO-LASIK.

Study of change in contrast sensitivity in relation to depth of ablation after wavefront optimized myopic laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis.

Purpose:The aim of this work was to study the change in contrast sensitivity (CS) in relation to depth of stromal ablation after wavefront-optimized (WFO) myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).Methods:This was as prospective, longitudinal, comparative study. The study participants were divided into two groups: Group 1 ≤50 μ ablation depth; 60 eyes and group 2 >50 μ ablation depth; 60 eyes. All underwent WFO LASIK. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA) and CS were measured preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 week, 2 weeks, and 2 and 6 months. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), Unpaired t test and one-way repeated measures ANOVA were used to test differences across time periods within each treatment group. A value of P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.Results:The mean ablation depths in groups 1 and 2 were 39.30 μ ± 7.22 μ and 69.90 μ ± 12.09 μ, respectively; the maximum depth was 94.62 μ. In group 1, the preoperative mean CS was 1.91 ± 0.07, which improved postoperatively at 1 week (1.93 ± 0.06) and remained stable in subsequent follow-ups (1.94 ± 0.05). In group 2, the mean CS preoperatively was 1.87 ± 0.12, which postoperatively at 1 week and 6 months were 1.93 ± 0.07 and 1.94 ± 0.03, respectively (P < 0.05). Between the groups, preoperative CS was significantly different (P = 0.04), but the change in CS post-LASIK was insignificant (P > 0.05).Conclusion:There was a significant improvement in CS after WFO myopic LASIK in all patients irrespective of ablation depth (up to 94.62 μ).

Topography-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia: Surgical outcomes

To compare the outcomes of topography-guided and wavefront-optimized surgery in patients having laser insitu keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia. Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, and BALGEUN-EYE21 Operation Center, Gwangju, South Korea. Prospective case study. Patients had topography-guided LASIK in 1 eye and wavefront-optimized LASIK in the contralateral eye using Contoura Vision software and the WaveLight EX500 excimer laser. Refractive and visual outcomes were analyzed 3months postoperatively. The study comprised 43 patients. In both groups, the postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.0 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution or better in 90.7% of eyes and the residual spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error was ±0.75 diopter (D) in 81.4% of eyes. The UDVA, residual SE refractive error, and astigmatism did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. There was significant induction of higher-order aberrations (HOAs) in both groups, although corneal coma and trefoil did not increase and ocular trefoil decreased significantly in the topography-guided group (P=.038). However, in the wavefront-optimized group, corneal coma and trefoil increased significantly (P<.001 and P=.046, respectively) and ocular trefoil did not change significantly. In addition, topography-guided LASIK induced significantly fewer corneal total HOAs (P<.001), coma (P<.001), and trefoil (P=.020) than wavefront-optimized LASIK. Although both topography-guided LASIK and wavefront-optimized LASIK safely and effectively achieved the predicted refractive and visual outcomes, topography-guided LASIK induced fewer HOAs and significantly decreased ocular trefoil, corneal total HOAs, and coma.

Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Wavefront-Guided and Wavefront-Optimized Laser in Situ Keratomileusis

To compare outcomes in wavefront-optimized (WFO) laser insitu keratomileusis (LASIK) to high-resolution wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK. Randomized, fellow eye controlled, clinical trial. A total of 200 eyes of 100 patients with myopia or compound myopic astigmatism undergoing bilateral LASIK between October 2015 and February 2017 underwent wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK in 1 eye and wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK in the fellow eye. Each eye was evaluated for uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), contrast sensitivity, refractive error, and wavefront aberrometry. Outcome measurement primarily UDVA at 12months. Secondary outcomes were safety, predictability, stability, refractive error, CDVA, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations at 12months. WFG LASIK had higher levels of supervision and better contrast sensitivity compared to WFO. Both types had excellent postoperative UDVA results, without a significant difference in either mean UDVA or frequency of achieving a specified UDVA, for example, 20/16 or better (all P > 0.05). The mean gain in lines of CDVA was significantly higher in the WFG than in the WFO group (0.80 ± 0.75 vs 0.62 ±0.72, respectively; P= 0.04). The WFG cohort had significantly better contrast sensitivity for mean and frequency of achieving >20/40 for <5% low-contrast sensitivity (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.5-46.7 vs 24.7%; 95% CI, 16.2-33.3, respectively; P=0.01) and >20/32 for <25% low-contrast sensitivity (10.3%; 95% CI, 4.3-16.4 vs 4%, respectively; 95% CI, 0.0-8.1, respectively; P= 0.04). The WFO group had a significantly higher frequency of <0.25 diopters (D) of refractive astigmatism at 12months (82.5%; 95% CI, 75.0-90.0; vs 72.1%, respectively; 95% CI, 63.2-81.2; P= 0.02) but not <0.50 D (95.6%; 95% CI, 91.9-99.8; vs 96.9, respectively; 95% CI, 93.5-100; P= 0.61). The WFG group was significantly closer to emmetropia for both sphere and spherical equivalents at all time points. Trefoil was significantly lower in the WFG group and was also significantly lower than preoperative measurements. Wavefront-optimized and high-resolution wavefront-guided LASIK achieve excellent visual outcomes. Nonetheless, treatments based on a high-resolution aberrometer appear to offer superior results in some regards.

Comparative analysis of outcomes after wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized laser in-situ keratomileusis in high myopic eyes

Purpose The aim was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes after laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in high myopia using wavefront-guided (WFG) and wavefront-optimized (WFO) ablation profiles provided by two different excimer laser platforms. Patients and methods Prospective, consecutive, comparative, and masked clinical trial including 41 high myopic eyes treated with WFG LASIK using the Advanced CustomVue system (WFG group) and 40 eyes treated with a WFO profile using the Allegretto EX-500 platform (WFO group). Visual, refractive, contrast sensitivity (CVS-1000), and aberrometric outcomes were evaluated in both groups of eyes during a 6-month follow-up. Results The efficacy index was significantly better in the WFG group compared with the WFO (1.01±0.11 vs. 0.96±0.12, P=0.038). The safety index was also significantly better in the WFG group (1.03±0.12 vs. 0.94±0.11, P=0.011). All eyes achieved postoperatively an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/25 or better in the WFG group, whereas 87.5% of eyes achieved this uncorrected distance visual acuity in the WFO group. More eyes gained one line of corrected distance visual acuity in the WFG group (36.5 vs. 15.0%, P=0.015). Significantly lower postoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (P=0.045) and cylinder (P=0.005) were found in the WFG group. Manifest refraction spherical equivalent was within ±1.00 D in 90.3% and 80% of eyes in WFG and WFO groups, respectively (P=0.001). Contrast sensitivity decreased significantly only in the WFO group (P≤0.0397). More significant increase in high-order aberrations was found in the WFO group (P≤0.005). Conclusion WFG LASIK provides better efficacy, safety, predictability, and preservation of visual quality in high myopic eyes than WFO LASIK.

Comparative analysis of the efficacy of astigmatic correction after wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK in low and moderate myopic eyes.

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of the astigmatic correction achieved with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with myopic astigmatism using wavefront-guided (WFG) and wavefront-optimized (WFO) ablation profiles. Prospective study included 221 eyes undergoing LASIK: 99 and 122 eyes with low and moderate myopic astigmatism (low and moderate myopia groups). Two subgroups were differentiated in each group according to the ablation profile: WFG subgroup, 109 eyes (45/64, low/moderate myopia groups) treated using the Advanced CustomVue platform (Abbott Medical Optics Inc.), and WFO subgroup, 112 eyes (54/58, low/moderate myopia groups) treated using the EX-500 platform (Alcon). Clinical outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up, including a vector analysis of astigmatic changes. Significantly better postoperative uncorrected visual acuity and efficacy index was found in the WFG subgroups of each group (P≤0.041). Postoperative spherical equivalent and cylinder were significantly higher in WFO subgroups (P≤0.003). In moderate myopia group, a higher percentage of eyes with a postoperative cylinder ≤0.25 D was found in the WFG subgroup (90.6% vs 65.5%, P=0.002). In low and moderate myopia groups, the difference vector was significantly higher in the WFO subgroup compared to WFG (P<0.001). In moderate myopia group, the magnitude (P=0.008) and angle of error (P<0.001) were also significantly higher in the WFO subgroup. Significantly less induction of high order aberrations were found with WFG treatments in both low and moderate myopia groups (P≤0.006). A more efficacious correction of myopic astigmatism providing a better visual outcome is achieved with WFG LASIK compared to WFO LASIK.

Outcomes of topography-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia in virgin eyes

To compare the outcomes of topography-guided and wavefront-optimized treatment in patients having laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia. Advanced Eye Centre, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India. Prospective contralateral-eye case study. Patients had topography-guided LASIK in 1 eye and wavefront-optimized LASIK in the contralateral eye using the Customized Refractive Surgery Master software and Mel 80 excimer laser. Refractive (residual manifest refraction spherical equivalent [MRSE], higher-order aberrations [HOAs]), and visual (uncorrected distance visual acuity [UDVA] and photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity) outcomes were prospectively analyzed 6months postoperatively. The study comprised 35 patients. The UDVA was 0.0 logMAR or better and the postoperative residual MRSE was ±0.50 diopter in 94.29% of eyes in the topography-guided group and 85.71% of eyes in the wavefront-optimized group (P=.09). More eyes in the topography-guided group than in the wavefront-optimized group had a UDVA of -0.1 logMAR or better (P=.04).Topography-guided LASIK was associated with less deterioration of mesopic contrast sensitivity at higher spatial frequencies (12 cycles per degree [cpd] and 18 cpd) and lower amounts of induced coma (P=.04) and spherical aberration (P=.04). Less stromal tissue was ablated in the topography-guided group (mean 61.57μm±16.23 [SD]) than in the wavefront-optimized group (mean 79.71±14.81μm)(P<.001). Although topography-guided LASIK and wavefront-optimized LASIK gave excellent results, topography-guided LASIK was associated with better contrast sensitivity, lower induction of HOAs, and a smaller amount of tissue ablation. None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Wavefront-Guided Versus Wavefront-Optimized Laser in situ Keratomileusis for Patients With Myopia: A Prospective Randomized Contralateral Eye Study

To compare the clinical outcomes of wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Prospective, randomized, fellow-eye-controlled study. The setting was a single academic institution. The study population included 110 eyes of 55 patients with myopia with and without astigmatism. One eye of each patient was randomized to undergo wavefront-guided LASIK by the AMO Visx CustomVue S4 IR excimer laser system; the fellow eye received wavefront-optimized LASIK by the Alcon Allegretto Wave Eye-Q 400 Hz excimer laser system. Corneal flaps were constructed using the Intralase FS 60 Hz femtosecond laser. Patients were followed at postoperative months 1, 3, 6, and 12. The study's main outcome measures were uncorrected visual acuity, stability of refractive correction, contrast sensitivity, and wavefront aberrometry. After 12 months, LASIK eyes had achieved visual acuity of 20/12.5 or better (30 eyes, 56%) in the wavefront-guided group compared to those receiving wavefront-optimized treatment (22 eyes, 41%) (P = 0.016). Average spherical equivalent refractions were -0.13 ± 0.46 diopters in wavefront-guided eyes whereas in wavefront-optimized eyes the refractions were -0.41 ± 0.38 diopters at 12 months. Wavefront-guided eyes also achieved better best-corrected visual acuity at both the 5% and 25% contrast levels (P = 0.022 and P = 0.004, respectively). There were no differences in levels of residual astigmatism (P = 0.798) or in higher order aberrations (P = 0.869). Both wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized treatments are able to correct myopia safely and effectively in eyes with and without astigmatism. However, wavefront-guided treatment platforms appear to offer significant advantages in terms of residual refractive error, uncorrected distance acuity and contrast sensitivity.

Wavefront-optimized excimer laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and myopic astigmatism: Refractive outcomes and corneal densitometry

To determine the refractive outcomes of wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) treatments, in particular to measure corneal densitometry after LASIK using the densitometry function of the Pentacam Scheimpflug system. Division of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. Cohort study. Changes in postoperative visual acuity, refraction, and contrast sensitivity were evaluated after wavefront-optimized laser treatment. Corneal densitometry was evaluated with the Scheimpflug system before and after LASIK. One year postoperatively, the uncorrected distance visual acuity was 6/6 or better in 92% of eyes and 6/9 or better in all eyes. Eighty-six percent of eyes had no change in the corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA); 4% gained 1 or more lines. Wavefront-optimized LASIK was stable over 1 year postoperatively. Eighty-nine percent of eyes were within ±0.50 diopter (D) and 100% were within ±1.00 D of the intended correction 1 year postoperatively. Contrast sensitivity showed a nonsignificant improvement (1.55 ± 0.10 [SD] preoperatively to 1.57 ± 0.09 12 months postoperatively) (P > .05). There was a nonsignificant increase in corneal densitometry 1 year postoperatively (from 12.72 ± 2.43 to 13.04 ± 2.58) (P > .05). No correlation was found between corneal densitometry and contrast sensitivity or CDVA. Wavefront-optimized LASIK gave excellent refractive and visual outcomes and did not seem to affect corneal densitometry significantly 1 year postoperatively. However, larger studies may show a masked effect on corneal densitometry. No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Meta-Analysis of Wavefront-Guided vs. Wavefront-Optimized LASIK for Myopia

To detect possible differences in clinical outcomes between wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and wavefront-optimized LASIK for the treatment of myopia. A comprehensive literature search of Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE to identify relevant trials comparing LASIK with wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized. A meta-analysis was performed on the results of the reports. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Seven articles describing a total of 930 eyes were identified. There were no statistically significant differences in the final proportion of eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better [odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66 to 1.65; p = 0.86], manifest refractive spherical equivalent within ± 0.50 D of the target (odds ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.75; p = 0.90). No patient lost ≥ 2 lines of distance-corrected visual acuity at posttreatment. The changes in higher order aberrations were not statistically significant different between the two groups with preoperative root-mean-square (RMS) higher order aberrations <0.3 μm (weighted mean difference, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.04; p = 0.57). However, wavefront-guided had a significant better postoperative aberration profile than wavefront-optimized with preoperative RMS higher order aberrations >0.3 μm (weighted mean difference, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.15 to -0.06; p < 0.00001). Both wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK have shown excellent efficacy, safety, and predictability. The wavefront-guided technology may be a more appropriate choice for patients who have preoperative RMS higher order aberrations >0.3 μm.

Visual acuity and higher-order aberrations with wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis

To compare visual acuity and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) after wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). This retrospective study comprised refraction-matched myopic eyes that had wavefront-guided (Visx Star S4 laser) or wavefront-optimized (WaveLight Allegretto Wave laser) LASIK targeted for emmetropia. Preoperative and postoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, and preoperative and postoperative HOAs were compared. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences between the wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized groups in age, sex, corneal thickness, MRSE, or HOAs (all P>.05). The mean MRSE was -2.88 diopters (D) +/- 2.6 (SD) and -2.96 +/- 2.6 D, respectively, preoperatively and -0.01 +/- 0.25 D and -0.02 +/- 0.33 D, respectively, postoperatively; 96% of all eyes were within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia postoperatively. There were no differences in UDVA, CDVA, MRSE, or HOAs between groups (all P>.05). The UDVA was 20/20 or better in 85% of eyes in the wavefront-guided group and 86% of eyes in the wavefront-optimized group. All eyes had 20/25 or better CDVA postoperatively; no eye lost 2 lines of CDVA. Fourteen eyes were converted from wavefront-guided to wavefront-optimized treatment because of poor limbal ring alignment (8 eyes), a wave scan not consistent with the manifest refraction (5 eyes), and no iris registration (1 eye). Wavefront-guided LASIK and wavefront-optimized LASIK produced equivalent visual outcomes and no differences in HOAs. Wavefront-guided treatment could not be performed in many eyes because of difficulties during wavefront measurement.

Wavefront-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis: Contralateral comparative study

To compare the outcomes of wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized treatment in fellow eyes of patients having laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia. Medical and Vision Research Foundation, Tamil Nadu, India. This prospective comparative study comprised 27 patients who had wavefront-guided LASIK in 1 eye and wavefront-optimized LASIK in the fellow eye. The Hansatome (Bausch & Lomb) was used to create a superior-hinged flap and the Allegretto laser (WaveLight Laser Technologie AG), for photoablation. The Allegretto wave analyzer was used to measure ocular wavefront aberrations and the Functional Acuity Contrast Test chart, to measure contrast sensitivity before and 1 month after LASIK. The refractive and visual outcomes and the changes in aberrations and contrast sensitivity were compared between the 2 treatment modalities. One month postoperatively, 92% of eyes in the wavefront-guided group and 85% in the wavefront-optimized group had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 or better; 93% and 89%, respectively, had a postoperative spherical equivalent refraction of +/-0.50 diopter. The differences between groups were not statistically significant. Wavefront-guided LASIK induced less change in 18 of 22 higher-order Zernike terms than wavefront-optimized LASIK, with the change in positive spherical aberration the only statistically significant one (P= .01). Contrast sensitivity improved at the low and middle spatial frequencies (not statistically significant) and worsened significantly at high spatial frequencies after wavefront-guided LASIK; there was a statistically significant worsening at all spatial frequencies after wavefront-optimized LASIK. Although both wavefront-guided and wavefront-optimized LASIK gave excellent refractive correction results, the former induced less higher-order aberrations and was associated with better contrast sensitivity.