Transient light sensitivity after femtosecond laser flap creation: Clinical findings and management

2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl G. Stonecipher ◽  
Jon G. Dishler ◽  
Teresa S. Ignacio ◽  
Perry S. Binder
Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1588
Author(s):  
Piotr Kanclerz ◽  
Ramin Khoramnia

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 Jul 15, 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.


2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (12) ◽  
pp. 2075-2079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gonzalo Muñoz ◽  
César Albarrán-Diego ◽  
Hani F. Sakla ◽  
Jaime Javaloy ◽  
Jorge L. Alió

2014 ◽  
pp. 1883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iraklis Vastardis ◽  
Bojan Pajic ◽  
Zisis Gatzioufas ◽  
Brigitte Pajic-Eggspuehler ◽  
Farhad Hafezi

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (8) ◽  
pp. 850-851 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Ide ◽  
George D. Kymionis ◽  
David A. Goldman ◽  
Sonia H. Yoo ◽  
Terrence P. O’Brien

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Yvon ◽  
Timothy J. Archer ◽  
Marine Gobbe ◽  
Dan Z. Reinstein

Healthcare ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Bransfield ◽  
Dylan M. Aidlen ◽  
Michael J. Cook ◽  
Sagar Javia

Many late-stage chronic Lyme disease clinical findings are neuropsychiatric. A total clinical assessment is critical in diagnosis, especially since controversy surrounds the reliability of laboratory testing. The clinical findings of one hundred Lyme disease patients with chronic neuropsychiatric symptoms were entered into a database. The prevalence of each clinical finding pre-infection and post-infection was compared and calculated within the 95% confidence interval. Patients had minimal symptoms pre-infection, but a high post-infection prevalence of a broad spectrum of acquired multisystem symptoms. These findings included impairments of attention span, memory, processing, executive functioning, emotional functioning, behavior, psychiatric syndromes, vegetative functioning, neurological, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, upper respiratory, dental, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and other symptoms. The most prevalent symptoms included sustained attention impairments, brain fog, unfocused concentration, joint symptoms, distraction by frustration, depression, working memory impairments, decreased school/job performance, recent memory impairments, difficulty prioritizing multiple tasks, fatigue, non-restorative sleep, multitasking difficulties, sudden mood swings, hypersomnia, mental apathy, decreased social functioning, insomnia, tingling, word finding difficulties, name retrieval, headaches, sound hypersensitivity, paresis, anhedonia, depersonalization, cold intolerance, body temperature fluctuations, light sensitivity and dysfluent speech. The average patient had five symptoms pre-infection and 82 post-infection. Pattern recognition is critical in making a diagnosis. This study was used to develop three clinical assessment forms.


2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 2092-2098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahzad I. Mian ◽  
Amy Y. Li ◽  
Satavisha Dutta ◽  
David C. Musch ◽  
Roni M. Shtein

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sloan W. Rush ◽  
Philip Cofoid ◽  
Ryan B. Rush

Purpose. To report the incidence and outcomes of anterior chamber gas bubble formation during femtosecond laser flap creation for laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).Methods. The charts of 2,886 consecutive eyes that underwent femtosecond LASIK from May 2011 through August 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. The incidence, preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed in subjects developing anterior chamber gas bubble formation during the procedure.Results. A total of 4 cases (0.14%) developed anterior chamber gas bubble formation during femtosecond laser flap creation. In all four cases, the excimer laser was unable to successfully track the pupil immediately following the anterior chamber bubble formation, temporarily postponing the completion of the procedure. There was an ethnicity predilection of anterior chamber gas formation toward Asians (p=0.0055). An uncorrected visual acuity of 20/20 was ultimately achieved in all four cases without further complications.Conclusions. Anterior chamber gas bubble formation during femtosecond laser flap creation for LASIK is an uncommon event that typically results in a delay in treatment completion; nevertheless, it does influence final positive visual outcome.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document