Comparison of LASIK with the OPDCAT or OATz algorithm using the NIDEK EC-5000CXII excimer laser

Yoshiko Hori-Komai, Ikuko Toda, Takahiro Yamamoto, Kazuo Tsubota

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare refractive outcomes, higher order aberrations, visual quality, and patient satisfaction between aspheric and whole-eye wavefront aspheric LASIK algorithms. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-four eyes of 152 patients undergoing LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism were divided into two groups: eyes that underwent treatment using either the OPD-guided customized aspheric treatment (OPDCAT) or optimized aspheric treatment zone (OATz). Both groups were subdivided into two groups based on preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) <-6.00 diopters (D) and eyes with MRSE ≥-6.00 D. Both groups were additionally subdivided into eyes with preoperative ocular higher order aberrations <0.40 μm and eyes with higher order aberrations ≥0.40 μm. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, 88.3% (242/274) of eyes were available for follow-up. Postoperatively, 91.4% of eyes in the OPDCAT group and 90.6% of eyes in the OATz group were within 0.50 D. No difference in refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction among groups or subgroups was noted (P>.05). A significantly less change in asphericity (less oblate) was noted for the OPDCAT group (0.31±0.30) compared with the OATz group (0.51±0.35) (P<.05). A lower induction of aberrations in the OPDCAT group compared with the OATz group was noted (P<.05). Mesopic contrast sensitivity was significantly higher for the OPDCAT groups and subgroups (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Refractive outcomes between groups or subgroups were equivalent. A significantly lower induction of higher order aberrations and less change in asphericity in the OPDCAT group was noted. The OPDCAT algorithm was more likely to maintain mesopic contrast sensitivity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)411-422
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Refractive Surgery
Volume26
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Excimer Lasers
Laser In Situ Keratomileusis
Therapeutics
Contrast Sensitivity
Astigmatism
Myopia
Patient Satisfaction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Comparison of LASIK with the OPDCAT or OATz algorithm using the NIDEK EC-5000CXII excimer laser. / Hori-Komai, Yoshiko; Toda, Ikuko; Yamamoto, Takahiro; Tsubota, Kazuo.

In: Journal of Refractive Surgery, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2010, p. 411-422.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hori-Komai, Yoshiko ; Toda, Ikuko ; Yamamoto, Takahiro ; Tsubota, Kazuo. / Comparison of LASIK with the OPDCAT or OATz algorithm using the NIDEK EC-5000CXII excimer laser. In: Journal of Refractive Surgery. 2010 ; Vol. 26, No. 6. pp. 411-422.
@article{d0a9d2ff576b483bb7e131cc5b2b0d0d,
title = "Comparison of LASIK with the OPDCAT or OATz algorithm using the NIDEK EC-5000CXII excimer laser",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To compare refractive outcomes, higher order aberrations, visual quality, and patient satisfaction between aspheric and whole-eye wavefront aspheric LASIK algorithms. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-four eyes of 152 patients undergoing LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism were divided into two groups: eyes that underwent treatment using either the OPD-guided customized aspheric treatment (OPDCAT) or optimized aspheric treatment zone (OATz). Both groups were subdivided into two groups based on preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) <-6.00 diopters (D) and eyes with MRSE ≥-6.00 D. Both groups were additionally subdivided into eyes with preoperative ocular higher order aberrations <0.40 μm and eyes with higher order aberrations ≥0.40 μm. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, 88.3{\%} (242/274) of eyes were available for follow-up. Postoperatively, 91.4{\%} of eyes in the OPDCAT group and 90.6{\%} of eyes in the OATz group were within 0.50 D. No difference in refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction among groups or subgroups was noted (P>.05). A significantly less change in asphericity (less oblate) was noted for the OPDCAT group (0.31±0.30) compared with the OATz group (0.51±0.35) (P<.05). A lower induction of aberrations in the OPDCAT group compared with the OATz group was noted (P<.05). Mesopic contrast sensitivity was significantly higher for the OPDCAT groups and subgroups (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Refractive outcomes between groups or subgroups were equivalent. A significantly lower induction of higher order aberrations and less change in asphericity in the OPDCAT group was noted. The OPDCAT algorithm was more likely to maintain mesopic contrast sensitivity.",
author = "Yoshiko Hori-Komai and Ikuko Toda and Takahiro Yamamoto and Kazuo Tsubota",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.3928/1081597X-20090617-14",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "411--422",
journal = "Journal of Refractive Surgery",
issn = "0883-0444",
publisher = "Slack Incorporated",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of LASIK with the OPDCAT or OATz algorithm using the NIDEK EC-5000CXII excimer laser

AU - Hori-Komai, Yoshiko

AU - Toda, Ikuko

AU - Yamamoto, Takahiro

AU - Tsubota, Kazuo

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare refractive outcomes, higher order aberrations, visual quality, and patient satisfaction between aspheric and whole-eye wavefront aspheric LASIK algorithms. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-four eyes of 152 patients undergoing LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism were divided into two groups: eyes that underwent treatment using either the OPD-guided customized aspheric treatment (OPDCAT) or optimized aspheric treatment zone (OATz). Both groups were subdivided into two groups based on preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) <-6.00 diopters (D) and eyes with MRSE ≥-6.00 D. Both groups were additionally subdivided into eyes with preoperative ocular higher order aberrations <0.40 μm and eyes with higher order aberrations ≥0.40 μm. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, 88.3% (242/274) of eyes were available for follow-up. Postoperatively, 91.4% of eyes in the OPDCAT group and 90.6% of eyes in the OATz group were within 0.50 D. No difference in refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction among groups or subgroups was noted (P>.05). A significantly less change in asphericity (less oblate) was noted for the OPDCAT group (0.31±0.30) compared with the OATz group (0.51±0.35) (P<.05). A lower induction of aberrations in the OPDCAT group compared with the OATz group was noted (P<.05). Mesopic contrast sensitivity was significantly higher for the OPDCAT groups and subgroups (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Refractive outcomes between groups or subgroups were equivalent. A significantly lower induction of higher order aberrations and less change in asphericity in the OPDCAT group was noted. The OPDCAT algorithm was more likely to maintain mesopic contrast sensitivity.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare refractive outcomes, higher order aberrations, visual quality, and patient satisfaction between aspheric and whole-eye wavefront aspheric LASIK algorithms. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-four eyes of 152 patients undergoing LASIK for myopia and myopic astigmatism were divided into two groups: eyes that underwent treatment using either the OPD-guided customized aspheric treatment (OPDCAT) or optimized aspheric treatment zone (OATz). Both groups were subdivided into two groups based on preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) <-6.00 diopters (D) and eyes with MRSE ≥-6.00 D. Both groups were additionally subdivided into eyes with preoperative ocular higher order aberrations <0.40 μm and eyes with higher order aberrations ≥0.40 μm. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, 88.3% (242/274) of eyes were available for follow-up. Postoperatively, 91.4% of eyes in the OPDCAT group and 90.6% of eyes in the OATz group were within 0.50 D. No difference in refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction among groups or subgroups was noted (P>.05). A significantly less change in asphericity (less oblate) was noted for the OPDCAT group (0.31±0.30) compared with the OATz group (0.51±0.35) (P<.05). A lower induction of aberrations in the OPDCAT group compared with the OATz group was noted (P<.05). Mesopic contrast sensitivity was significantly higher for the OPDCAT groups and subgroups (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Refractive outcomes between groups or subgroups were equivalent. A significantly lower induction of higher order aberrations and less change in asphericity in the OPDCAT group was noted. The OPDCAT algorithm was more likely to maintain mesopic contrast sensitivity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954355361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954355361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3928/1081597X-20090617-14

DO - 10.3928/1081597X-20090617-14

M3 - Article

C2 - 19681511

AN - SCOPUS:77954355361

VL - 26

SP - 411

EP - 422

JO - Journal of Refractive Surgery

JF - Journal of Refractive Surgery

SN - 0883-0444

IS - 6

ER -