scholarly journals Astigmatism Correction during Femtosecond Laser-assisted Transepithelial Arcuate Keratotomy Using the Wound Open Method

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 1592-1599
Author(s):  
Joon Kyo Chung ◽  
Gyu Le Han ◽  
Hoon Noh ◽  
Dong Hui Lim ◽  
Tae-Young Chung
Keyword(s):  
Femtosecond Laser ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Retrospective Survey ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Open Method ◽  
Astigmatism Correction ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Surgically Induced

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare corneal astigmatism correction between “wound open” and “wound intact” methods during femtosecond laser-assisted transepithelial arcuate keratotomy.Methods: From April 2016 to December 2018, a retrospective survey was conducted on patients undergoing femtosecond laser cataract surgery at the Ophthalmology Department of Samsung Medical Center. Size comparison and vector analysis of corneal astigmatism before and after surgery were performed in the wound open and wound intact groups.Results: In the wound open and wound intact groups, the target-induced astigmatism (TIA) was 1.28 ± 0.55; and 1.26 ± 0.29 diopters, the surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was 0.80 ± 0.52; and 0.53 ± 0.32 diopters, and the correction index (CI) was 0.63 ± 0.28; and 0.43 ± 0.26, respectively. The astigmatism correction was superior in the wound open group (p = 0.048, p = 0.025). In a subgroup with TIA < 1.2 diopters, there were no significant differences in SIA or CI between the two groups; however, in the subgroup with a TIA > 1.2 diopters, the SIA was 1.09 ± 0.59; and 0.54 ± 0.37 diopters and the CI was 0.60 ± 0.28; and 0.36 ± 0.23 in the wound open and wound intact groups, respectively (p = 0.022, p = 0.047). Thus, astigmatism correction was superior in the wound open group.Conclusions: The wound open method during femtosecond laser-assisted transepithelial arcuate keratotomy was superior for astigmatism correction compared to the wound intact method.

scholarly journals Prediction of surgically induced astigmatism in manual and femtosecond laser-assisted clear corneal incisions

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 398-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquín Fernández ◽  
Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo ◽  
Javier Martínez ◽  
Ana Tauste ◽  
David P Piñero
Keyword(s):  
Femtosecond Laser ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Toric Intraocular Lens ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Orthogonal Components ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Surgically Induced ◽  
Corneal Incisions ◽  
Intraocular Lens Calculation

Purpose: To assess the surgically induced astigmatism with femtosecond laser-assisted and manual temporal clear corneal incisions and to evaluate the performance of a model for prediction of the surgically induced astigmatism based on the preoperative corneal astigmatism. Methods: Clinical data of 104 right eyes and 104 left eyes undergoing cataract surgery, 52 with manual incisions and 52 with femtosecond laser-assisted incisions in each eye group, were extracted and revised retrospectively. In all cases, manual incisions were 2.2 mm width and femtosecond incisions were 2.5 mm width, both at temporal location. A predictive model of the surgically induced astigmatism was obtained by means of simple linear regression analyses. Results: Mean surgically induced astigmatisms for right eyes were 0.14D@65° (manual) and 0.24D@92° (femtosecond) (p > 0.05) and for left eyes, 0.15D@101° (manual) and 0.19D@104° (femtosecond) (p > 0.05). The orthogonal components of the surgically induced astigmatism (XSIA, YSIA) were significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with the preoperative orthogonal components of corneal astigmatism (Xpreop, Ypreop) (r = −0.29 for X and r = −0.1 for Y). The preoperative astigmatism explained 8% of the variability of the XSIA and 3% of the variability of YSIA. The postoperative corneal astigmatism prediction was not improved by the surgically induced astigmatism obtained from the model in comparison with the simple vector subtraction of the mean surgically induced astigmatism. Conclusion: Temporal incisions induce similar astigmatism either for manual or for femtosecond procedures. This can be clinically negligible for being considered for toric intraocular lens calculation due to the great standard deviation in comparison with the mean. The usefulness of the prediction model should be confirmed in patients with high preoperative corneal astigmatism.

scholarly journals Effect of femtosecond laser-assisted steepest-meridian clear corneal incisions on preexisting corneal regular astigmatism at the time of cataract surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 1895-1900
Author(s):  
Wei Chen ◽  
Jian Wu ◽  
Yong Wang ◽  
Jing Zhou ◽  
Rong-Rong Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femtosecond Laser ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Corneal Incision ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Clear Corneal Incision ◽  
Case Series Study ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Surgically Induced ◽  
Corneal Incisions

AIM: To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted steepest-meridian clear corneal incisions for correcting preexisting corneal astigmatism performed at the time of cataract surgery. METHODS: This prospective case series study comprised consecutive age-related cataract patients with corneal regular astigmatism (range: +0.75 to +2.50 D) who had femtosecond laser-assisted steepest-meridian clear corneal incisions (single or paired). Corneal astigmatism was performed with the Pentacam preoperatively and 3mo postoperatively. Total corneal astigmatism and steepest-meridian measured in the 3-mm central zone were used to guide the location, size and number of clear corneal incision. The vector analysis of astigmatic change was performed using the Alpins method. RESULTS: Totally 138 eyes of 138 patients were included. The mean preoperative corneal astigmatism was 1.31±0.41 D, and was significantly reduced to 0.69±0.34 D (equivalent to difference vector) after surgery (P<0.01). The surgically-induced astigmatism was 1.02±0.54 D. The correction index (ratio of target induced astigmatism and surgically-induced astigmatism: 0.72±0.36) as well as the magnitude of error (difference between surgically-induced astigmatism and target induced astigmatism: -0.29±0.51) represented a slight under correction. For angle of error, the arithmetic mean was 1.11±13.70, indicating no significant systematic alignment errors. CONCLUSION: Femtosecond-assisted steepest-meridian clear corneal incision is a fast, customizable, adjustable, precise, and safe technique for the reduction of low to moderate corneal astigmatism during cataract surgery.

Comparison of using Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer G4 and Barrett formula in predicting low cylinder preoperatively for cataract surgeries

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1320-1327
Author(s):  
Yi-Ju Ho ◽  
Chi-Chin Sun ◽  
Jiahn-Shing Lee ◽  
Ken-Kuo Lin ◽  
Chiun-Ho Hou
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Intraocular Lens Implantation ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Lens Implantation ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Median Absolute Error ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Surgically Induced

Purpose: To compare corneal astigmatism estimation from Barrett toric calculator, with measurement from Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer G4 in low corneal cylinder patients. Methods: Preoperative corneal astigmatism was measured using Auto Kerato-Refractometer (AutoKM), IOL Master, and Galilei G4 (combined Placido-dual Scheimpflug analyzer) and was processed by Barrett toric calculator with measurements obtained from Auto Kerato-Refractometer and from IOL Master. A total of 42 eyes undergoing cataract surgery with nontoric intraocular lens implantation were included. Corneal astigmatism was calculated based on manifest refractive astigmatism with implications of surgically induced astigmatism. Errors in predicted residual astigmatism were calculated by the difference between postoperative manifest cylindrical refractive error and preoperative corneal cylinder using vector analysis. Results: Centroid error in predicted residual astigmatism was with-the-rule 0.36 D for AutoKM and 0.48 D for IOL Master, was lower at 0.24 D for the Barrett–IOL Master, and was lowest at 0.21 D for the Barrett–AutoKM ( p < .001). The Galilei G4 demonstrated the highest centroid error for SimK (0.53 D) and lower for total corneal power (0.49 D). The Barrett toric calculator obtained the lowest median absolute error in predicted residual astigmatism for AutoKM (0.43 D) and IOL Master (0.54 D). The Barrett–IOL Master demonstrated that 61% and 76% of eyes were within 0.50 and 0.75 D of the predicted residual astigmatism, respectively. Conclusion: The Barrett–IOL Master had more accurate prediction of residual astigmatism for low astigmatism eyes before cataract surgery compared to Galilei Dual Scheimpflug Analyzer G4 in this study.

scholarly journals Minimizing Surgically Induced Astigmatism at the Time of Cataract Surgery Using a Square Posterior Limbal Incision

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Ernest ◽  
Warren Hill ◽  
Richard Potvin
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Corneal Incision ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Clear Corneal Incision ◽  
Refractive Outcomes ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Surgically Induced ◽  
Corneal Incisions

Purpose. To compare the surgically induced astigmatism from clear corneal and square posterior limbal incisions at the time of cataract surgery.Methods. Surgically induced astigmatism was calculated for a set of eyes after cataract surgery using a temporal 2.2 mm square posterior limbal incision. Results were compared to similar available data from surgeons using clear corneal incisions of similar size.Results. Preoperative corneal astigmatism averaged 1.0 D and was not significantly different between the incision types. Surgically induced astigmatism with the 2.2 mm posterior limbal incision averaged0.25±0.14 D, significantly lower in magnitude than the aggregate surgically induced astigmatism produced by the 2.2 mm clear corneal incision (0.68±0.49 D).Conclusion. The 2.2 mm square posterior limbal incision induced significantly less, and significantly less variable, surgically induced astigmatism relative to a similar-sized clear corneal incision. This is likely to improve refractive outcomes, particularly important with regard to premium intraocular lenses.

Prewound Assisted Technique for Hydrophobic Foldable Intraocular Lens Implantation

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 569-572
Author(s):  
Takuya Shiba ◽  
Hiroshi Tsuneoka
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
The Other ◽  
Implantation Technique ◽  
Iol Implantation ◽  
Surgically Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Lens Implantation ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Induced Astigmatism ◽  
Surgically Induced

Purpose To describe a technique for intraocular lens (IOL) implantation that lessens the degree of surgical invasiveness by implanting a tightly rolled IOL through a small incision without touching the eye with the cartridge tip. Methods An IOL was inserted through an incision by first allowing the leading haptic to protrude slightly from the cartridge tip. It was then injected through the incision without allowing any part of the cartridge to touch the eye during IOL implantation. In one eye, the entire circumference of the beveled portion of the cartridge tip was inserted into the anterior chamber to implant the IOL, whereas in the other eye, the IOL was inserted through the incision by first allowing the leading haptic to protrude slightly from the cartridge tip. It was then injected through the incision without allowing any part of the cartridge to touch the eye during IOL implantation. We analyzed the incision width before and after IOL implantation and the degree of surgically induced astigmatism on the day after surgery and at 1 and 3 months after surgery. Results Using our technique, both the amount by which the wound was enlarged and the hydration rate were significantly lower compared with conventional IOL implantation. Our method enables IOL implantation to be carried out through a small incision at a width that was only previously possible with forcible insertion. Conclusions Our IOL implantation technique can be performed using both hands with no need to immobilize the eyeball.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document