Advances in refractive surgery: Microkeratome and femtosecond laser flap creation in relation to safety, efficacy, predictability, and biomechanical stability

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 368-372

  Stonecipher, Karl ^a,c   Ignacio, Teresa S ^b   Stonecipher, Megan ^d  

^a Laser Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Southeastern Eye Center   (United States)

^d NONE

Author keywords

Biomechanical stability; Efficacy; Femtosecond laser; Microkeratome; Predictability; Safety

Indexed keywords

ASTIGMATISM; FEMTOSECOND LASER FLAP; HEALING; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KERATOMILEUSIS; LASER; LASER SAFETY; LASER SURGERY; MICROKERATOMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFRACTIVE SURGERY; REVIEW; SURGICAL INSTRUMENT; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

BIOMECHANICS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; KERATOMILEUSIS, LASER IN SITU; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; SURGICAL FLAPS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33747037219     PISSN: 10408738     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.icu.0000233957.88509.2d     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Kurtz RM, Liu X, Elner VM, et al. Photodisruption in the human cornea as a function of laser pulse width. J Refract Surg 1997; 13:653-658.
2. Kezirian G, Stonecipher K. Comparison of the IntraLase femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30:804-811.
3. Tran D, Sarayba M, Bor Z, et al. Randomized prospective clinical study comparing induced aberrations with Intralase and Hansatome flap creation in fellow eyes. Potential impact on wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31:97-105.
4. Durrie D, Kezirian G. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical keratome flaps in wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis: prospective contralateral eye study. J Cataract Refract Surg; 2005 Jan; 31(1):120-126.
5. Duffey R. Thin flap laser in situ keratomileusis: flap dimensions with the Moria LSK-One manual microkeratome using the 100 micron head. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31:1159-1162.
6. Pallikaris IG, Kymionis GD, Astyrakakis NI. Corneal ectasia induced by laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27:1796-1802.
7. Wang Z, Chen J, Yang B. Posterior corneal surface topographic changes after laser in situ keratomileusis are related to residual corneal bed thickness. Ophthalmology 1999; 106:406-409.
8. Seitz B, Torres F, Langenbucher A, et al. Posterior corneal curvature changes after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 2001; 108:666-672.
9. Amoils SP, Deist MB, Gous P, Amoils PM. Iatrogenic keratoectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis for less than -40 to -70 diopters for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000; 26:967-977.
10. Chayet AS. Clinical experience with the Nidek MK-2000 keratome. J Refract Surg (Suppl) 2005; 21:S659.
11. Pietila J, Makinen P, Suominen S, et al. Corneal flap measurements in laser in situ keratomileusis using the Moria M2 automated microkeratome J Refract (Suppl) 2005 Sep-Oct; 21(5 Suppl): S659.
12. Giledi O, Daya SM. Unexpected flap thickness in laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003; 29:1825-1826.
13. Eisner RA, Binder PS. A technique for measuring LASIK flap thickness using the IntraLase laser. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006 April; 32(4):556-558.
14. Stonecipher KG, Dishler JG, Ignacio TS, Binder PS. Transient light sensitivity after femtosecond laser flap creation: clinical findings and management. J Refract Surg 2006; 32:91-94.
15. Guell J, Velasco F, Roberts C, et al. Corneal flap thickness and topography changes induced by flap creation during laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31:115-119.
16. Huang D, Arif M. Spot size and quality of scanning laser correction of higher order wavefront aberrations. J Refract Surg 2001; 17:S588-S591.
17. Vinciguerra P, Azzolini M, Airaghi P, et al. Effect of decreasing surface and interface irregularities after photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg 1998; 14 (2 Suppl):S199-S203.
18. Vinciguerra P, Azzolini M, Radice P, et al. A method for examining surface and interface irregularities after photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis on optical and functional outcomes. J Refract Surg 1998; 14 (14 Suppl):S204-S206.
19. Porter J, MacRae S, Yoon G, et al. Separate effects of the microkeratome incision and laser ablation on the eye's wave aberration. Am J Ophthalmol 2003; 136:327-337.
20. Kuhle A, Rosen B, Garnaes J. Comparison of roughness measurement with atomic force microscopy and interference microscopy. SPIE 2003; 5188:154-161.
21. Binder PS, Moore M, Lambert RW, Seagrist DM. Comparison of two microkeratome systems. J Refract Surg 1997; 13:142-153.
22. Tham V, Maloney R. Microkeratome complications of laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 2000; 107:920-924.
23. Kurtz RM, Sarayba MA, Juhasz T. In Fermann M, Galvanauskas A, Sucha G, editors. Ultrafast lasers: technology and applications. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 2003.
24. Sarayba MA. American Academy of Ophthalmology, October 15-18, 2005, Chicago, IL.
25. Stonecipher KG. The debate continues: intralase vs mechanical keratomes. Royal Hawaiian Eye Meeting; 15-20 January 2006; Maui, HI.
26. Lee MH. A contralateral clinical trial comparing a mechanical microkeratome to a femtosecond laser. Royal Hawaiian Eye Meeting; 15-20 January 2006; Maui, HI.
27. Kanellopoulos AJ, Pe LH, Kleiman L. Moria M2 single use microkeratome head in 100 consecutive LASIK procedures. J Ref Surg 2005; Sept-Oct; 21(5):476-479.
28. Binder P. Flap dimensions created with the IntraLase FS laser. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30:26-32.
29. Stonecipher KG, Kezirian GM. Flap thickness predictability. Data presented at the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery Symposium; 16-19 April 2005; Washington, DC.
30. Choudhri SA, Feigenbaum SK, Pepose JS. Factors pedictive of LASIK flap thickness with the Hansatome Zero Compression Microkeratome. J Refract Surg 2005; 21:253-259.
31. Stonecipher KG, Kezirian GM. Wavefront-guided and optimized treatments with keratectomies using the Moria disposable and the Intralase 30 kHz FS keratome. Data presented at the Meeting of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons; 10-14 September 2005; Lisbon, Portugal.
32. Tanzer, DJ, Schallhorn S, Brown MC, et al. Comparison of femtosecond vs. mechanical microkeratome in wavefront guided LASIK. Data presented at the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery Symposium; 15-20 April 2005; Washington, DC.
33. Kim WS, Jo JM. Corneal hydration affects ablation during laser in situ keratomileusis. Cornea 2001; 20:394-397.
34. Dougherty PJ, Wellish KL, Maloney RK. Excimer ablation rate and corneal hydration. Am J Ophthalmol 1994; 118:169-176.
35. Qazi M, Roberts C, Mahmoud A, Pepose J. Topographic and biomechanical differences between hyperopic and myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31:48-60. Study concluding that the hyperopic LASIK produced a less uniform topographic than typical myopic treatments.
36. Jaycock PD, Lobo L, Ibrahim J, et al. Interferometric technique to measure biomechanical changes in the cornea induced by refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31:175-184. Study concluding that corneal biomechanical integrity is compromised after microkeratome incisions.
37. Schmack I, Dawson D, McCarey B, et al. Cohesive tensile strength of human LASIK wounds with histologic, ultrastructural, and clinical correlations. J Refract Surg 2005; 21:433-445. Study measuring the cohesive tensile strength of human LASIK corneal wounds.
38. Alio JL, Ortiz D, Pinero D. Flap biomechanics with the femtosecond and mechanical microkeratomes. Data presented at the Meeting of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons; 10-14 September 2005; Lisbon, Portugal.