This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

Conventional LASIK appears effective for residual errors after wavefront-guided LASIK

Add topic to email alerts

Receive an email when new articles are posted on

Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on .

Subscribe

Added to email alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

Back to Healio

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Back to Healio

Conventional LASIK effectively and safely treated patients with residual refractive error after conventional or wavefront-guided LASIK, a retrospective study found.

George J.C. Jin, MD, PhD, and colleagues at the Eye Institute of Utah in Salt Lake City reviewed the visual outcomes of 154 eyes of 114 patients treated with conventional LASIK re-treatments. The study included 101 eyes initially treated with conventional myopic LASIK (group 1) and 53 eyes initially treated with wavefront-guided myopic LASIK (group 2).

The re-treatments were performed at a mean 8.7 months after the initial surgery to correct residual myopia in 53 (52%) group 1 patients and 18 (34%) group 2 patients, for residual hyperopia in 31 (31%) group 1 patients and 23 (43%) group 2 patients, and for mixed astigmatism in 17 (17%) group 1 patients and 12 (23%) group 2 patients.

At a mean 7.8 months after re-treatment, 88 eyes (87%) in group 1 and 48 eyes (91%) in group 2 had a spherical equivalent (SE) refraction within ± 0.5 D of emmetropia, and 97 eyes (96%) in group 1 and 53 eyes (100%) in group 2 were within ± 1 D, according to the study.

Among patients in group 1, those treated for residual myopia had a significantly better safety index as well as logMAR best corrected visual acuity compared to group 1 patients treated for residual hyperopia or mixed astigmatism. However, no significant differences were noted between subgroups in any parameters for patients in group 2, the authors noted.

All eyes in group 2 and 98% of eyes in group 1 had an uncorrected visual acuity of 20/30 or better, and 75% of both groups had a UCVA of 20/20 or better. No eyes in either group lost two or more lines of BCVA, according to the study.

"These results point out that re-treatments with conventional LASIK for patients after wavefront-guided myopic LASIK are at least as effective and safe as those for patients after standard myopic LASIK," the study authors said.

"Our findings may suggest that conventional LASIK retreatment poses no greater risk after wavefront-guided ablation than after standard ablation with respect to quality of vision," they said.

The study is published in the September issue of Ophthalmology.