Topography-Guided vs Wavefront-Optimized Surface Ablation for Myopia Using the WaveLight Platform: A Contralateral Eye Study

Falavarjani, Khalil Ghasemi; Hashemi, Masih; Modarres, Mehdi; Sanjari, Mostafa Soltan; Darvish, Niloufar; Gordiz, Arzhang

doi:10.3928/1081597x-20100310-02

Cited by 36 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported study comparing these platforms in photorefractive keratectomy. The findings of our prospective, randomized, fellow-eye study support previous research that the VISX CustomVue wavefront-guided and the WaveLight Allegretto wavefront-optimized platforms are both effective and predictable in photorefractive keratectomy 24–26. Falavarjani et al showed that the wavefront-optimized Allegretto platform and a topography-guided platform had similar statistical outcomes 26.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Moshirfar¹,

Churgin²,

Betts³

et al. 2011

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare differences in visual outcomes, higher-order aberrations, contrast sensitivity, and dry eye in patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy using wavefront-guided VISX CustomVue™ and wavefront-optimized WaveLight® Allegretto platforms.MethodsIn this randomized, prospective, single-masked, fellow-eye study, photorefractive keratectomy was performed on 46 eyes from 23 patients, with one eye randomized to WaveLight Allegretto, and the fellow eye receiving VISX CustomVue. Three-month postoperative outcome measures included uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, refractive error, root mean square of total and grouped higher-order aberrations, contrast sensitivity, and Schirmer’s testing.ResultsMean values for uncorrected distance visual acuity (logMAR) were −0.03 ± 0.07 and −0.06 ± 0.09 in the wavefront-optimized and wavefront-guided groups, respectively (P = 0.121). Uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better was achieved in 91% of eyes receiving wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy, and 87% of eyes receiving wavefront-optimized photorefractive keratectomy, whereas uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/15 was achieved in 35% of the wavefront-optimized group and 64% of the wavefront-guided group (P ≥ 0.296). While root mean square of total higher-order aberration, coma, and trefoil tended to increase in the wavefront-optimized group (P = 0.091, P = 0.115, P = 0.459, respectively), only spherical aberration increased significantly (P = 0.014). Similar increases were found in wavefront- guided root mean square of total higher-order aberration (P = 0.113), coma (P = 0.403), trefoil (P = 0.603), and spherical aberration (P = 0.014). There was no significant difference in spherical aberration change when comparing the two platforms. The wavefront-guided group showed an increase in contrast sensitivity at 12 cycles per degree (P = 0.013).ConclusionBoth VISX CustomVue and WaveLight Allegretto platforms performed equally in terms of visual acuity, safety, and predictability in photorefractive keratectomy. The wavefront-guided group showed slightly improved contrast sensitivity. Both lasers induced a comparable degree of statistically significant spherical aberration, and tended to increase other higher-order aberration measures as well.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Moshirfar¹,

Churgin²,

Betts³

et al. 2011

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike the wave-front guided lasers, which account for aberrations in the cornea, lens, and retina, topography guided lasers attempt to neutralize corneal irregularities and preserve its aspheric shape 4. Topography-guided lasers are shown to be superior for highly aberrated corneas when wavefront maps cannot be easily obtained 2,5.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

Moshirfar¹,

Shah²,

Skanchy³

et al. 2017

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.MethodsIn this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThe mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively.ConclusionFDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery.

show abstract

“…There is limited data directly comparing topography-guided with wavefront-based ablations for primary treatments. Falavarjani et al [79] demonstrated similar visual outcomes and contrast sensitivity after PRK with topography-guided ablation in one eye and wavefront-optimized ablation in the fellow eye. In cases of an increased angle kappa, topography-guided ablations centered on the corneal vertex have been shown to better approximate the visual axis than wavefront-guided ablations centered on the pupil [80].…”

Section: Topography-guided Laser Refractive Surgerymentioning

confidence: 71%

Comparison of femtosecond and excimer laser platforms available for corneal refractive surgery

Chen

Manche

2016

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in femtosecond and excimer laser technology have not only improved the safety and efficacy of refractive procedures, but have also led to the development of promising new treatment modalities, such as SMILE and the use of wavefront-guided and topography-guided ablation. Future studies and continued technological progress will help to better define the optimal use of these treatment platforms.

show abstract

Topography-Guided vs Wavefront-Optimized Surface Ablation for Myopia Using the WaveLight Platform: A Contralateral Eye Study

Abstract: using the WaveLight excimer laser platform for PRK, CDVA and contrast sensitivity outcomes were statistically similar between the wavefront-optimized and topography-guided ablations in eyes with low to moderate myopia with and without astigmatism.

Cited by 36 publications

References 19 publications

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

Comparison of femtosecond and excimer laser platforms available for corneal refractive surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Topography-Guided vs Wavefront-Optimized Surface Ablation for Myopia Using the WaveLight Platform: A Contralateral Eye Study

Abstract: using the WaveLight excimer laser platform for PRK, CDVA and contrast sensitivity outcomes were statistically similar between the wavefront-optimized and topography-guided ablations in eyes with low to moderate myopia with and without astigmatism.

Cited by 36 publications

References 19 publications

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight&reg; Allegretto Wave&reg; Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight&reg; Allegretto Wave&reg; Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

Comparison of femtosecond and excimer laser platforms available for corneal refractive surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations

Prospective, randomized, fellow eye comparison of WaveLight® Allegretto Wave® Eye-Q versus VISX CustomVueTM STAR S4 IRTM in photorefractive keratectomy: analysis of visual outcomes and higher-order aberrations