1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(99)80043-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Laser in situ keratomileusis to correctrefractive errors after keratoplasty

Abstract: The correction of refractive error with LASIK in postkeratoplasty patients proved to be safe, effective, and predictable. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to determine the method's clinical value.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
50
1
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
50
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…89,90 Laser in situ keratomileusis has the advantage of correcting a wider range of spherical errors and astigmatism than PRK, and it provides effective and predictable refractive outcomes following keratoplasty. [91][92][93][94][95] Although LASIK reduces the risk for postoperative haze and corneal scarring compared with PRK, some potential complications are associated with flap creation. [96][97][98] Other adverse events include ectasia, dry-eye syndrome, epithelial ingrowth, and diffuse lamellar keratopathy.…”
Section: Excimer Lasermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…89,90 Laser in situ keratomileusis has the advantage of correcting a wider range of spherical errors and astigmatism than PRK, and it provides effective and predictable refractive outcomes following keratoplasty. [91][92][93][94][95] Although LASIK reduces the risk for postoperative haze and corneal scarring compared with PRK, some potential complications are associated with flap creation. [96][97][98] Other adverse events include ectasia, dry-eye syndrome, epithelial ingrowth, and diffuse lamellar keratopathy.…”
Section: Excimer Lasermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This result is generally better than that previously reported with PRK techniques for postkeratoplasty astigmatism [11][12][13][14][15] and is comparable to reports after LASIK. [16][17][18][19][20][21] It is likely that further refinements to treatment algorithms will improve refractive outcomes.…”
Section: Spherical Equivalentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[11][12][13][14][15] Recent reports of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) have been more encouraging, with a reduction in spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error of up to 96% and cylindrical reduction of up to 71%. [16][17][18][19][20][21] Although haze-related problems can be overcome in LASIK, there is an increased risk for developing flap-related complications due to graft override and graft-host misalignments. In a long-term follow-up study of LASIK in postkeratoplasty eyes, Hardten et al 22 highlight the need for extreme caution in patient selection due to the above-mentioned problems.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1][2][3] Therapeutic options vary and include spectacles and contact lenses for mild regular astigmatism (0.50 to 3.00 diopters [D]), refractive lasers for moderate regular astigmatism (3.00 to 5.00 D), and surgical procedures for severe regular and irregular astigmatism (O5.00 D). [4][5][6][7][8] In the past several years, photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) have acquired a significant role in the management of post-PKP refractive errors but could be limited in the amount of astigmatism that can be treated after corneal transplantation. [6][7][8] Surgical procedures such as relaxing incisions and wedge resections are used for more advanced astigmatism but have been associated with unpredictable results and high complication rates.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%