Prospective, contralateral comparison of 120-μm and 90-μm LASIK flaps using the IntraLase FS60 femtosecond laser

Journal of Refractive Surgery

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 251-259

  Moshirfar, Majid ^a   Hatch, Bryndon B ^a   Chang, JoAnn C ^a   Kurz, Christopher J ^b   Eugarrios, Marcela F ^c   Mifflin, Mark D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b DAVID GRANT MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Instituto de Oftalmología Loyola   (Nicaragua)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GATIFLOXACIN; KETOROLAC TROMETAMOL; PREDNISOLONE ACETATE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CORRECTED DISTANCE VISUAL ACUITY; EYE EXAMINATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KERATOMILEUSIS; MALE; MYOPIA; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF REPORT; TISSUE FLAP; UNCORRECTED DISTANCE VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL ACUITY;

ABERROMETRY; ADULT; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CORNEAL STROMA; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; KERATOMILEUSIS, LASER IN SITU; LASERS, EXCIMER; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOPIA; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; SURGICAL FLAPS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ACUITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79954560923     PISSN: 1081597X     EISSN: 19382391     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20100624-01     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Sakimoto T, Rosenblatt MI, Azar DT. Laser eye surgery for refractive errors. Lancet. 2006;367(9520):1432-1447.
2. Alió JL, Ortiz D, Moftuoglu O, Garcia MJ. Ten years after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for moderate to high myopia (control-matched study). Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93(10):1313-1318.
3. Azar DT, Ghanem RC, de la Cruz J, Hallak JA, Kojima T, Al-Tobaigy FM, Jain S. Thin-flap (sub-Bowman keratomileusis) versus thick-flap laser in situ keratomileusis for moderate to high myopia: case control analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34(12):2073-2078.
4. Kamiya K, Shimizu K, Ohmoto F. Comparison of the changes in corneal biomechanical properties after photorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis. Cornea. 2009;28(7):765-769.
5. McCarty CA, Garrett SK, Aldred GF, Taylor HR. Assessment of subjective pain following photorefractive keratectomy. Melbourne Excimer Laser Group. J Refract Surg. 1996;12(3):365-369. (Pubitemid 26114686)
6. Hersh PS, Steinert RF, Brint SF. Photorefractive keratectomy versus laser in situ keratomileusis: comparison of optical side effects. Summit PRK-LASIK Study Group. Ophthalmology. 2000;107(5):925-933.
7. Randleman JB. Post-laser in-situ keratomileusis ectasia: current understanding and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17(4):406-412. (Pubitemid 44215053)
8. Slade SG. Removal of corneal tissue: why a customized sub-Bowman's flap is the best approach in LASIK. Cataract and Refractive Surgery Today. November 2006;45-46.
9. Pesudovs K, Garamendi E, Elliott DB. The quality of life impact of refractive correction (QIRC) questionnaire: development and evaluation. Optom Vis Sci. 2004;81(10):769-777. (Pubitemid 39363472)
10. Durrie DS, Slade SG, Marshall J. Wavefront-guided excimer laser ablation using photorefractive keratectomy and sub-Bowman's keratomileusis: a contralateral eye study. J Refract Surg. 2008;24(1):S77-S84.
11. US Food and Drug Administration. Medical Devices. LASIK. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/lasik/lasers.htm. Accessed November 2008.
12. Siegel S, Castellan NJ, Castellan NJ Jr. The case of one sample, to measures, or paired replicates: the McNewmar change test. In: Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988:79.
13. Bühren J, Pesudovs K, Martin T, Strenger A, Yoon GY, Kohnen T. Comparison of optical quality metrics to predict subjective quality of vision after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(5):846-855.
14. Lee JM, Lee DJ, Jung WJ, Park WC. Comparison between anterior corneal aberration and ocular aberration in laser refractive surgery. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2008;22(3):164-168.
15. Yamane N, Miyata K, Samejima T, Hiraoka T, Kiuchi T, Okamoto F, Hirohara Y, Mihashi T, Oshika T. Ocular higher-order aberrations and contrast sensitivity after conventional laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45(11):3986-3990. (Pubitemid 39411151)
16. Bühren J, Martin T, Kühne A, Kohnen T. Correlation of aberrometry, contrast sensitivity, and subjective symptoms with quality of vision after LASIK. J Refract Surg. 2009;25(7):559-568.
17. Slade SG, Durrie DS, Binder PS. A prospective, contralateral eye study comparing thin-flap LASIK (sub-Bowman keratomileusis) with photorefractive keratectomy. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(6):1075-1082.
18. Morse JS, Schallhorn SC, Hettinger K, Tanzer D. Role of depressive symptoms in patient satisfaction with visual quality after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(2):341-346.
19. Solomon KD, Fernández de Castro LE, Sandoval HP, Biber JM, Groat B, Neff KD, Ying MS, French JW, Donnenfeld ED, Lindstrom RL; Joint LASIK Study Task Force. LASIK world literature review: quality of life and patient satisfaction. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(4):691-701.
20. Bailey MD, Zadnik K. Outcomes of LASIK for myopia with FDA-approved lasers. Cornea. 2007;26(3):246-254. (Pubitemid 46568820)
21. Schallhorn SC, Amesbury EC, Tanzer DJ. Avoidance, recognition, and management of LASIK complications. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141(4):733-739.
22. Kezirian GM, Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30(4):804-811. (Pubitemid 38501473)