Copenhagen 2016 Registration Programme Exhibitor Information Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2016 Hotel Star Alliance
title

10 - 14 Sept. 2016, Bella Center, Copenhagen, Denmark

This Meeting has been awarded 27 CME credits

 

escrs app advert yo advert

Comprehensive astigmatism planning and analysis with AMARIS

Search Title by author or title

Session Details

Session Title: Photoablation

Session Date/Time: Tuesday 13/09/2016 | 14:00-16:00

Paper Time: 15:09

Venue: Hall C2

First Author: : M.Arbelaez OMAN

Co Author(s): :    N. Alpins   G. Stamatelatos   S. Verma   J. Arbelaez   S. Arba Mosquera        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of different optimized astigmatism plan strategies based upon manifest refraction and corneal cylinder. Aberration-Free CAM treatments have been performed in all cases.

Setting:

Muscat Eye Laser Center ( muscat - Oman)

Methods:

The planning of optimized astigmatic corrections based upon corneal and manifest astigmatism has been evaluated at 3M follow-up in 200 eyes showing ORA >0,75D pre-operative. 100 treatments based upon manifest astigmatism, and 100 treatments on optimized astigmatic corrections based upon corneal and manifest astigmatism (vector planning group). In all cases standard examinations, pre- and postoperative corneal-wavefront analyses (OPTIKON Scout), and ocular-wavefront aberrometries (Ocular Wavefront Analyzer) were performed. CAM software was used to plan Aberration-Free treatments and AMARIS system was used to perform ablations (SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions). Optimized astigmatic corrections were evaluated in terms of efficacy, predictability, stability, safety, and aberrations outcomes.

Results:

Vector Planning shows no inferiority vs. manifest Rx planning. UDVA and CDVA outcomes are similar (p>0.05) and excellent in both groups (mean VA -0.05±0.10logMAR). Postoperative Refractions are similar (p>0.05) and excellent in both groups (mean SE -0.05±0.20D; mean Ast -0.3±0.2D). Corneal toricity was smaller (p<0.05) in vector planning group (mean toricity 0.6±0.4D in vector planning group; 0.9±0.4D in manifest refraction group).

Conclusions:

The slight superiority in the vector planning group could be attributed to: 1. Uncertainty in manifest Rx vs. objective measurement of corneal toricity 2. Corneal toricity as main driver of manifest astigmatism 3. Going half-way (60%-40%) represents a sort of optimum balance for minimum residual risk

Financial Disclosure:

... gains financially from product or procedure presented, ... travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, ... travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... is employed by a competing company

Back to previous