This content is only available for ASCRS Members
This content from the 2020 ASCRS Virtual Annual Meeting is only available to ASCRS members. To log in, click the teal "Login" button in the upper right-hand corner of this page.
Filed Under
Refractive
Astigmatism
LASIK
topography-guided ablation
astigmatism management
2020 paper presentation
Purpose
To identify adjustments in manifest sphere and cylinder treatment to compensate effects of treating higher order aberrations (Zernicke Polynomials C6-C27) to optimize topography-guided LASIK outcomes. We hypothesize C11 and C13 (high order astigmatism) should affect cylinder treatment similar to C12 (spherical aberration) with spherical treatment.
Methods
Data from 500 eyes (out of a planned 1,000) which underwent topography-guided LASIK using the EX500 (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX) for C6-C27 was analyzed using regression analysis and non-linear optimization to assess whether programmed cylinder and spherical treatments should be adjusted to minimize post-operative refractive error at 1-month. Additionally, differences between manifest cylinder and Vario estimated cylinder at the axes of 0/90 and 45/135 degrees were compared against C7 and C8 (coma) as well as C11 and C13.
Results
C11 is associated with directional difference in manifest and Vario cylinder at 45/135 degrees (regression coefficient: 1.30 ± 0.27, P < 0.001). C13 is associated with directional difference in manifest and Vario cylinder at 0/90 degrees (0.98 ± 0.30, P = 0.001). C7 and C8 are not significantly associated with cylinder directional differences (P = 0.68, 0.31) nor absolute vector differences (P= 0.44, 0.28) at the axes of 45/135 and 0/90. In surgical nomogram optimization, no variables were significantly correlated with cylinder change at either 0/90 or 45/135 degrees. C12 was found to be significantly correlated with spherical change (-0.70 ± 0.32, P = 0.03).
Conclusion
Adjustments to cylinder treatment to compensate C11 and C13 may be helpful based on the significant association with the difference in Vario and manifest refraction. Data from surgical outcomes is not conclusive but may be complicated by surgical result variability and post-operative refraction error reducing correlations.
To identify adjustments in manifest sphere and cylinder treatment to compensate effects of treating higher order aberrations (Zernicke Polynomials C6-C27) to optimize topography-guided LASIK outcomes. We hypothesize C11 and C13 (high order astigmatism) should affect cylinder treatment similar to C12 (spherical aberration) with spherical treatment.
Methods
Data from 500 eyes (out of a planned 1,000) which underwent topography-guided LASIK using the EX500 (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX) for C6-C27 was analyzed using regression analysis and non-linear optimization to assess whether programmed cylinder and spherical treatments should be adjusted to minimize post-operative refractive error at 1-month. Additionally, differences between manifest cylinder and Vario estimated cylinder at the axes of 0/90 and 45/135 degrees were compared against C7 and C8 (coma) as well as C11 and C13.
Results
C11 is associated with directional difference in manifest and Vario cylinder at 45/135 degrees (regression coefficient: 1.30 ± 0.27, P < 0.001). C13 is associated with directional difference in manifest and Vario cylinder at 0/90 degrees (0.98 ± 0.30, P = 0.001). C7 and C8 are not significantly associated with cylinder directional differences (P = 0.68, 0.31) nor absolute vector differences (P= 0.44, 0.28) at the axes of 45/135 and 0/90. In surgical nomogram optimization, no variables were significantly correlated with cylinder change at either 0/90 or 45/135 degrees. C12 was found to be significantly correlated with spherical change (-0.70 ± 0.32, P = 0.03).
Conclusion
Adjustments to cylinder treatment to compensate C11 and C13 may be helpful based on the significant association with the difference in Vario and manifest refraction. Data from surgical outcomes is not conclusive but may be complicated by surgical result variability and post-operative refraction error reducing correlations.
View More Presentations from this Session
This presentation is from the session "SPS-115 Refractive Procedure Comparisons: PRK, LASIK" from the 2020 ASCRS Virtual Annual Meeting held on May 16-17, 2020.