Main Article Content
Abstract
Patients and methods:400 patients (800 eyes) were taken in this study, all of them had myopia and myopic astigmatism with -1.0 to – 6.0 D(spherical equivalent) during the period between 2008-2014 in Nassirya city, south of Iraq. Those patients were divided into 5 groups each group with 80 patients (160 eyes) and planned to have post lasik refraction ofemmetrope, +0.5, +0.75, +1.0 and +1.25 D, for groups from no.1 to no.5 respectively and these groups followed up in term of UCVA, spherical equivalent, myopic shift, and asthenopia (eyestrain) for three years.
Result:Three yearsfollow up for the 5 groups showed that, in group no.1 (27.5%) of eyes had VA of 6/9 or worse, (33.125%) of eyes had myopic shift and(11.25%) of patients had eyestrain. In group no.2 (19.375%) of eyes had VA of 6/9 or worse ( 21.875%) of eyes had myopic shift and (8.75%) of patients had eyestrain. In group no.3 (11.25%)of eyes had VA of 6/9 or worse (9.375%) of eyes had myopic shift and (2.5%) of patients had eyestrain. In group no.4 ( 4.375%) of eyes had VA of 6/9 or worse, no myopic shift and (2.5%) of patients had eyestrain. In group no.5(12.5%) of eyes had VA of 6/9 or worse, no myopic shift and (15%) of patients had eye strain.
Conclusion: In young myopic patients with low to moderate myopia, we can choose post lasik aim of refraction of +1.0 D, this safe margin of hypermetropia SMH can ensure best UCVA without eyestrain (asthenopia), help in reducing regression and myopic shift.
Keywords
Article Details
References
- - Sutton Gl, Kim P. Laser in situ keratomileusis in 2010- a review. ClinExpOpthalmol 2010 Mar; 38(2):192-210.
- - O.J. Leuhumann, D.H. Verity,et al: Clinical optics and refraction , 1998: 60-61.
- - James F. Vander, MD: Ophthalmology secrets, second edition 2008: 123-132.
- - Kerry D. Solomon, Luis E. Fernandez de Castro, et al., Quality of life and patient satisfaction. American Academy of ophthalmology, Ophthalmology 2009 Apr; 116(4): 691-707.
- - McGhee CN, Craig JP, Sachdev N, Weed KH, Brown AD. Functional, psychological and satisfaction outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26:497-509.
- - James E. Sheedy, John Hayes, Jon Engle. Is all asthenopia the same. American academy of optometry, 2003; 80(11): 732-739.
- - Sugar A., Rapuano C.J., Culbertson W.W.,et. al., Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and astigmatism: Safety and Efficacy. A report by American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2002; 109: 175-187.
- - Bailey MD, Mitchell GL, Dhaliwal DK, et. al. Patient satisfaction and visual symptoms after laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 2003; 110: 1371-1378.
- - Takano M, Yoshida T, Omori K, Ogasawara K, Onodera T. Factors affecting the regression after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. Jap Orthopt J. 2005; 34:121-126.
- - Kim G, Christiansen SM, Moshirfar M. Change in keratometry after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refractive surg. 2014 Apr; 40(4): 564-574.
- - Dirani M, Couper T, Yau J, et al. Long-term refractive outcomes and stability after excimer laser surgery for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010 Oct; 36(10):1709-1717.
- - Perlman EM, Reinert SE. Factors influencing the need for enhancement after laser in situ keratomileusis. JCataract Refract Surg. 2004 Nov-Dec;20(6):783-789.
- - Pietila J, Huhtala A, Makineu P, Uusitalo H. Laser in situ keratomileusisenhancements with the Ziemer FEMTO LDV femtosecond laser following previous LASIK treatment. Graefes Arch ClinExp Ophthalmol.2013 Feb; 251(2):597-602.
- - Miyata K, Tokunaga T, Nakahara M, OhtaniS,Nejima R, et al., Residual bed thickness and corneal forward shift after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 May; 30(5):1067-1072.
References
- Sutton Gl, Kim P. Laser in situ keratomileusis in 2010- a review. ClinExpOpthalmol 2010 Mar; 38(2):192-210.
- O.J. Leuhumann, D.H. Verity,et al: Clinical optics and refraction , 1998: 60-61.
- James F. Vander, MD: Ophthalmology secrets, second edition 2008: 123-132.
- Kerry D. Solomon, Luis E. Fernandez de Castro, et al., Quality of life and patient satisfaction. American Academy of ophthalmology, Ophthalmology 2009 Apr; 116(4): 691-707.
- McGhee CN, Craig JP, Sachdev N, Weed KH, Brown AD. Functional, psychological and satisfaction outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26:497-509.
- James E. Sheedy, John Hayes, Jon Engle. Is all asthenopia the same. American academy of optometry, 2003; 80(11): 732-739.
- Sugar A., Rapuano C.J., Culbertson W.W.,et. al., Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and astigmatism: Safety and Efficacy. A report by American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2002; 109: 175-187.
- Bailey MD, Mitchell GL, Dhaliwal DK, et. al. Patient satisfaction and visual symptoms after laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 2003; 110: 1371-1378.
- Takano M, Yoshida T, Omori K, Ogasawara K, Onodera T. Factors affecting the regression after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. Jap Orthopt J. 2005; 34:121-126.
- Kim G, Christiansen SM, Moshirfar M. Change in keratometry after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refractive surg. 2014 Apr; 40(4): 564-574.
- Dirani M, Couper T, Yau J, et al. Long-term refractive outcomes and stability after excimer laser surgery for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010 Oct; 36(10):1709-1717.
- Perlman EM, Reinert SE. Factors influencing the need for enhancement after laser in situ keratomileusis. JCataract Refract Surg. 2004 Nov-Dec;20(6):783-789.
- Pietila J, Huhtala A, Makineu P, Uusitalo H. Laser in situ keratomileusisenhancements with the Ziemer FEMTO LDV femtosecond laser following previous LASIK treatment. Graefes Arch ClinExp Ophthalmol.2013 Feb; 251(2):597-602.
- Miyata K, Tokunaga T, Nakahara M, OhtaniS,Nejima R, et al., Residual bed thickness and corneal forward shift after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 May; 30(5):1067-1072.
