Comparison of visual acuity, refractive results and complications of femtosecond laser with mechanical microkeratome in LASIK
Author:
Corresponding Author:

Affiliation:

Clc Number:

Fund Project:

  • Article
  • |
  • Figures
  • |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference
  • |
  • Related
  • |
  • Cited by
  • |
  • Materials
  • |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    AIM:To compare the outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) performed with a femtosecond laser (Femtec, Technolas Perfect Vision GmbH, Germany) versus a mechanical microkeratome (Hansatome, Bausch and Lomb, USA) for the correction of myopia and astigmatism.METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients who had undergone LASIK using the 80-kHz Femtec femtosecond laser were compared to age- and refraction-matched patients in whom the Hansatome microkeratome was used. Refractive and visual results 1 month and 3 months postoperatively, and complication rates were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:A total of 280 eyes were analyzed (140 in each group).At 3 months postoperatively in the Femtec vs Hansatome group, spherical equivalent refraction was within ±1.00D of emmetropia in 140 vs 138 eyes (P=0.498), the cylinder was within ±0.50D in 137 vs 139 eyes (P=0.622), and the UDVA was 20/20 or better in 136 vs 137 eyes (P=0.724), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the complication rates between the two groups (P=0.099).CONCLUSION:LASIK performed both with Femtec femtosecond laser and Hansatome microkeratome achieved satisfactory refractive and visual results at 3 months postoperatively, without significant differences in efficacy, safety, and complication rates between the two procedures.

    Reference
    Related
    Cited by
Get Citation

Cemile Banu Cosar, Tansu Gonen, Murat Moray, et al. Comparison of visual acuity, refractive results and complications of femtosecond laser with mechanical microkeratome in LASIK. Int J Ophthalmol, 2013,6(3):350-355

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:
  • PDF:
  • HTML:
  • Cited by:
Publication History
  • Received:February 04,2013
  • Revised:May 17,2013
  • Adopted:May 17,2013
  • Online: June 24,2013
  • Published: