Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

One-year eye-to-eye comparison of wavefront-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis in hyperopes. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) Sáles, C. S., Manche, E. E. 2014; 8: 2229-2238

Abstract

To compare wavefront (WF)-guided and WF-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in hyperopes with respect to the parameters of safety, efficacy, predictability, refractive error, uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and higher order aberrations.Twenty-two eyes of eleven participants with hyperopia with or without astigmatism were prospectively randomized to receive WF-guided LASIK with the VISX CustomVue S4 IR or WF-optimized LASIK with the WaveLight Allegretto Eye-Q 400 Hz. LASIK flaps were created using the 150-kHz IntraLase iFS. Evaluations included measurement of uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, <5% and <25% contrast sensitivity, and WF aberrometry. Patients also completed a questionnaire detailing symptoms on a quantitative grading scale.There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for any of the variables studied after 12 months of follow-up (all P>0.05).This comparative case series of 11 subjects with hyperopia showed that WF-guided and WF-optimized LASIK had similar clinical outcomes at 12 months.

View details for DOI 10.2147/OPTH.S70145

View details for PubMedID 25419115