Interactive Free Papers

Topography-modified refraction (TMR): partial to total adjustment of treated cylinder amount and axis provided by topography data measured vs using the standard clinical refraction in myopic topography-guided LASIK

Free Paper Details

First Author: A.Kanellopoulos GREECE

Co Author(s):                        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare none vs. 50% vs. 100% adjustment of treated cylinder amount and axis (Topography-modified refraction) of the amount measured in manifest clinical refraction, in myopic topography-guided LASIK (Contoura® Vision).

Setting:

LaserVision.gr

Methods:

In this prospective contralateral eye study, 296 eyes of 148 patients were included: one eye of each patient was randomized to be treated with topography-modified refraction (TMR) either 50% TMR (group A) or 100% TMR (group B) while the contralateral-eye of each patient (group C) was randomized to be treated with the Standard Manifest Clinical Refraction (SMR). The 3 months peri-operative UDVA and CDVA, residual refractive and topographic cylinder, high order aberrations, and Contrast Sensitivity were compared between all three groups.

Results:

3m results for 50% TMR group vs 100% TMR group vs SMR group: 63 vs.85 vs. 148 eyes. UDVA was respectively: 1.12, 1.17 and 1.02, residual refractive cylinder: – 0,07 D, – 0,02 D, and – 0,28 D; residual topographic cylinder: 0,59 D, 0,39 D, 0,78D; high order aberrations: 0,61um, 0,48um and 0,79 um. The differences in UDVA NOT statistically significant (P>.05). The differences between both TMR groups, compared to SMR were statistically significant for 2 lines of vision gained, residual refractive cylinder, residual topographic cylinder and total high order aberrations (P < .05 for both comparisons).

Conclusions:

TMR appears to offer superior visual function outcomes in myopic topography-guided LASIK (Contoura® Vision) in terms of lines gained, and residual refractive and topographic astigmatism, and residual high order aberrations. In the parameters studied that revealed differences between these groups: both 50% and 100% TMR options appeared statistically significantly superior to the standard manifest clinical refraction, with no statistically significant difference between them, suggesting that 50% TMR only maybe sufficient for an effective improvement to when the standard manifest refraction was used.

Financial Disclosure:

... research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented