ESCRS - PO1240 - Comparative Analysis Of Aberration-Free Versus Corneal Wavefront-Guided Monocular Bi-Aspheric Ablation For Presbyopia Correction In Patients With Prior Laser Vision Correction

Comparative Analysis Of Aberration-Free Versus Corneal Wavefront-Guided Monocular Bi-Aspheric Ablation For Presbyopia Correction In Patients With Prior Laser Vision Correction

Published 2024 - 42nd Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PO1240 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/fp6k-gt80

Authors: David Kang* 1 , Byunghoon Chung 1 , Kangyoon Kim 1 , Samuel Arba-Mosquera 2

1Eyereum Eye Clinic,Seoul,Korea, Republic Of, 2Biomedical Engineering Office, Research and Development,Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH,Kleinostheim,Germany

Purpose

This investigation contrasts the six-month surgical outcomes of two distinct transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (transPRK) approaches utilizing the PresbyMAX monocular bi-aspheric ablation profiles—aberration-free (AF) and corneal wavefront-guided (CWFG)—in the nondominant eye of patients who have previously undergone laser vision correction (LVC), with the potential addition of conventional transPRK in the contralateral eye.

Setting

Retrospective case series

Methods

This study involved 18 eyes of 12 participants treated with the AF profile and 10 eyes of 8 participants treated with the CWFG profile, where the CWFG profile's maximum ablation depth was adjusted to align with that of the AF profile by selectively incorporating certain corneal higher-order aberrations (HOA) exceeding 0.5 diopter equivalent. The necessity for transPRK in the contralateral eye was determined by individual refractive requirements. Evaluations included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected visual acuities at distance and near, and corneal aberrations.

Results

After six months, the mean UDVA (logMAR) for dominant eyes was 0.02 ± 0.05 and 0.02 ± 0.03, and for nondominant eyes was 0.32 ± 0.15 and 0.28 ± 0.10, for AF and CWFG profiles, respectively. Remarkably, 90% of dominant eyes in both groups achieved a monocular UDVA of 20/20 or better. Among nondominant eyes, 80% in the AF group and 86% in the CWFG group reached a UDVA of 30/50 or better. For binocular outcomes, 100% of both groups attained a UDVA of 20/20 or greater, with 90% of the AF group and 91% of the CWFG group achieving a UNVA of J2 or better. The CWFG group exhibited significantly lower total corneal HOAs.

Conclusions

Both monocular bi-aspheric ablation profiles for presbyopia correction post-LVC showed efficacy and safety, with the CWFG profile presenting a reduction in corneal HOAs.