飞秒激光与机械角膜刀制瓣准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术后视觉质量对比分析

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.07.007

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (19)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (510 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Objective To compare and analyze the higher-order aberrations （HOA）， contrast sensitivity（CS） and CS under the glare after FEMTO LDV femtosecond laser flap and mechanical microkeratome Hansatome flap in laser in situ keratomileusis （LASIK）. Methods This was a prospective clinical controlled study. Ninety-two eyes of 46 patients were treated with FEMTO LDV as the observation group， and 104 eyes of 52 patients were treated with Hansatome as the control group. Wavefront-guided LASIK （Zyoptix） was performed on each of these eyes after the flap preparation. HOA， CS and CS under the glare were evaluated before surgery and 1 week， 1 month， 3 months after treatment. Data were analyzed using chi-square test， ANOVA， independent t test. Results At 1 week after the surgery， 59/92（64.1%） patients in the observation group had uncorrected visual acuity （UCVA） levels reaching or surpassing the preoperative best corrected visual acuity （BCVA）， while in the control group， this rate was 76/104（73.1%）. At 1 month after the surgery， the rate of UCVA≥preoperative BCVA was 82/92（89.1％） in observation group and 96/104（92.3%） in control group. At 3 months after the surgery， the rate of UCVA≥preoperative BCVA was 86/92（93.5%） in observation group and 96/104（92.3%） in control group. The two groups were not significantly different after the surgery （x²=1.423， 1.112， 0.183， P＞0.05）. The refraction was +0.49±0.24 D in the observation group and +0.35±0.32 D in the control group at 1 week after surgery， while at 3 months， it was +0.10±0.18 D in the observation group and -0.14±0.22 D in the control group. The differences between the 2 groups were insignificant （t=0.566， 1.178， P>0.05）. Higher-order aberration. At 1 week and 3 months， the HOA and coma in the observation group were all lower than in the control group （t1 w=-2.422， -2.295， t3 m=-1.957， -1.926， P＜0.05）. There were no difference in spherical aberration and trefoil between the 2 groups （t1 w=-1.395， -0.779， t3 m=-1.205， -0.922， P＞0.05）. The 2 groups photopic CS was not significantly different after the surgery. The observation group mesopic CS decreased to the lowest level at 1 week postoperation， and returned to preoperative level at 1 month after operation. At 1 month and 3 months， the CS were higher than preoperation at 3.0， 18.0 c/d （F=3.602， 3.216， P＜0.05）. At 1 week after surgery， the mesopic CS of the observation group was better than the control group at 6.0 c/d （t=2.326， P＜0.05）. The 2 groups mesopic CS was not significantly different at 1 month and 3 months after operation. At 1 week after surgery， the photopic CS under the glare stimulus of the observation group was significantly higher than the control group at 3.0， 12.0 c/d （t=2.173， 2.327， P＜0.05）. At 3 months， the medium to low spatial frequencies （1.5， 3.0， 6.0 c/d） the mesopic CS of observation group was higher than the control group （t=2.428， 2.416， 2.507， P＜0.05）. Conclusion Patients undergoing femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK have better quality of vision after surgery than hansatome patients.

Key words： Femtosecond laser Keratomileusis laser in situ Aberration Contrast sensitivity Glare

Received: 26 November 2012

Corresponding Authors: LIU Su-bing

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	MAI Zhi-bin
	LIU Su-bing
	NIE Xiao-li
	TANG Xiu-xia
	SUN Hong-xia
	XIN Bao-li

Cite this article:

MAI Zhi-bin,LIU Su-bing,NIE Xiao-li等. Comparison of visual quality after laser in situ keratomileusis flap creation with a femtosecond laser and a mechanical microkeratome[J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2013, 15(7): 409-413.

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.07.007 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2013/V15/I7/409

[1]	Binder PS. One thousand consecutive IntraLase laser in situ keratomileusis flaps. J Cataract Refract Surg，2006，32：962-969.
[2]	Kezirian GM， Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg，2004，30：804-811.
[3]	Montés-Micó R， Rodríguez-Galietero A， Alió JL. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical keratome LASIK for myopia. Ophthalmology，2007，114：62-68.
[4]	田磊，周跃华，王宁利，等. IntraLase FS60和Femto LDV飞秒激光制作角膜瓣的特点. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志，2011，13：4-8.
[5]	Marcos S. Aberrations and visual performance following standard laser vision correction. J Refract Surg，2001，17：S596-S601.
[6]	Applegate RA， Hilmantel G， Howland HC， et al. Corneal first surface optical aberrations and visual performance. J Refract Surg，2000，16：507-514.
[7]	Yamane N， Miyata K， Samejima T， et al. Ocular higher-order aberrations and contrast sensitivity after conventional laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2004，45：3986-3990.
[8]	Chalita MR， Krueger RR. Correlation of aberrations with visual acuity and symptoms. Ophthalmol Clin North Am，2004，17：135-142.
[9]	Mrochen M， Eldine MS， Kaemmerer M， et al. Improvement in photorefractive corneal laser surgery results using an active eye-tracking system. J Cataract Refract Surg，2001，27：1000-1006.
[10]	Krueger RR， Seiler T， Gruchman T， et al. Stress wave amplitudes during laser surgery of the cornea. Ophthalmology，2001，108：1070-1074.
[11]	Müller B， Boeck T， Hartmann C. Effect of excimer laser beam delivery and beam shaping on corneal sphericity in photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg，2004，30：464-470.
[12]	Montés-Micó R， Rodríguez-Galietero A， Alió JL， et al. Contrast sensitivity after LASIK flap creation with a femtosecond laser and a mechanical microkeratome. J Refract Surg，2007，23：188-192.
[13]	Pietilä J， Huhtala A， Jääskeläinen M， et al. LASIK flap creation with the Ziemer femtosecond laser in 787 consecutive eyes. J Refract Surg，2010，26：7-16.
[14]	Grosvenor T， Goss DA. Clinical management of myopia. Boston： Butterworth and Heinemann，1999：155-162.
[15]	Miller D. Optic and refraction. New York： Gower Medical Publishing，1991：15-23.
[16]	Montés-Micó R， Charman WN. Choice of spatial frequency for contrast sensitivity evaluation after corneal refractive surgery. J Refract Surg，2001，17：646-651.
[17]	Montés-Micó R， Charman WN. Mesopic contrast sensitivity function after excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy. J Refract Surg，2002，18：9-13.
[18]	Montés-Micó R， España E， Menezo JL. Mesopic contrast sensitivity function after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg，2003，19：353-356.
[19]	Oshika T， Okamoto C， Samejima T， et al. Contrast sensitivity function and ocular higher-order wavefront aberrations in normal human eyes. Ophthalmology，2006，113：1807-1812.