Visual outcomes of combined use of implantable collamer lens implantation and laser corneal visual correction for myopia over -18.00 diopters.

PURPOSE: This retrospective comparative case series explores visual outcomes in patients with extreme myopia receiving an implantable collamer lens (ICL) at -18.00 diopters (D), with central port, followed by bioptics via laser vision correction (LASIK or PRK) to address residual myopia or myopic astigmatism. SETTING: The study was conducted at Clínica Baviera - Aier Eye Hospital Group, Spain. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of cases. METHODS: The study assessed uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), predictability, safety, efficacy, and patient satisfaction after implantation of the ICL and bioptics. The model implanted was V4c and EVO (Staar Surgical), with a correction of -18.00 D. Bioptics were performed at least 3 months after implantation, and patients were followed up for at least 3 months after LASIK or PRK. RESULTS: The analysis included 125 eyes from 90 patients. Of these, 51.2% underwent LASIK and 48.8% PRK. Mean time from implantation to bioptics was 5.9 ± 9.4 months. Patients were followed up for a mean of 40.2 ± 37.9 months after bioptics. Median manifest refractive spherical equivalent was -2.89 D before bioptics and -0.49 D after. Median CDVA was 0.18 logMAR before bioptics and 0.17 after. The mean safety and efficacy indices were 2.22 ± 1.88 and 2.06 ± 1.85, respectively. CONCLUSION: Visual outcomes and safety indices following ICL implantation and subsequent LASIK or PRK in patients with extreme myopia are excellent.

Phacoemulsification with implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens in eyes with asteroid hyalosis and synchysis scintillans.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes in both eyes of patients who undergo phacoemulsification and trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and have asteroid hyalosis (AH) or synchysis scintillans (SS) in only one eye. METHODS: A retrospective comparative case series was performed. We evaluated uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), predictability, safety, efficacy, and satisfaction after implantation of the same model of trifocal IOL in both eyes (PhysIOL FineVision Pod-F and Micro-F and Rayner RayOne Trifocal). RESULTS: A total of 164 eyes of 82 patients (41 females, 50%) met the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in sphere, cylinder, spherical equivalent, UDVA, UIVA, or UNVA between the groups. Postoperative CDVA was slightly better in the control group (logMAR 0.03) than in the AH/SS group (logMAR 0.04) (P: 0.014). There were no statistically significant differences in predictability, safety index, or efficacy index between the groups. Overall subjective satisfaction was good (98.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Visual outcomes and satisfaction are good after implantation of trifocal IOLs in eyes with AH or SS. Therefore, trifocal IOLs should not be ruled out in these patients when no other vitreoretinal disorder is present.

Trifocal versus monofocal intraocular lens implantation in eyes previously treated with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia.

PURPOSE: To assess visual and refractive outcomes of trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in eyes that had previously undergone laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia and to compare them with those recorded after implantation of a monofocal IOL. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative cases series. METHODS: This study evaluated uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), safety, and efficacy after the implantation of two comparable trifocal IOL models and one monofocal IOL model in patients who had previously undergone myopic LASIK. Patients were classified according to the implanted IOL (monofocal or trifocal). RESULTS: A total of 211 eyes from 170 patients received a monofocal IOL, and 211 eyes from 161 patients received a trifocal IOL. At the end of the study, after lensectomy, there was a higher myopic residual spherical equivalent in the monofocal group because some eyes had been targeted for slight myopia to achieve monovision; therefore, UDVA was better in the trifocal group. CDVA was comparable in both groups. As expected, both monocular and binocular UNVA were significantly better in the trifocal group. Although the percentage of eyes that lost ≥1 line of CDVA did not differ between the groups, the safety index was slightly better in the monofocal group. CONCLUSION: Although implantation of monofocal and trifocal IOLs after myopic LASIK yielded excellent distance visual outcomes, UNVA was significantly better for the trifocal IOL, with a minimally worse safety profile. Trifocal IOLs can be considered after previous LASIK for myopia, with an appropriate patient selection.

Comparison of Patients With Emmetropia and Presbyopia and Different Accommodation Who Undergo Unilateral or Bilateral Implantation of a Trifocal IOL.

PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes and satisfaction in patients with emmetropia, presbyopia, and greater or lesser residual accommodation who undergo unilateral or bilateral implantation of a trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS: A multicenter, multisurgeon study was performed to evaluate outcomes in patients with emmetropia and presbyopia who underwent refractive lens exchange followed by implantation of a FineVision trifocal IOL (PhysIOL). The inclusion criteria were as follows: emmetropia, sphere -0.25 to +0.50 diopters (D), cylinder less than 0.75 D, and manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) of -0.25 to +0.25 D. All patients also had to have an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of Snellen 0.9 or better in each eye. The sample was divided into different clusters based on two variables: eyes operated on (monocular or binocular) and age either younger than 55 years or 55 years or older. Thus, four possible groups were created. Visual and refractive performance, patient satisfaction, and spectacle independence were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 690 eyes from 431 patients were evaluated. There was no difference in postoperative uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity between the groups. Binocular uncorrected near vision (UNVA) was better in patients who underwent surgery on both eyes regardless of age (median [interquartile range]: 0.00 [0.00; 0.10] vs 0.10 [0.00; 0.10] logMAR; P < .001). Binocular uncorrected intermediate vision (UIVA) was better in patients who underwent surgery on both eyes aged younger than 55 years than in those who underwent surgery in one eye aged 55 years or older (median [interquartile range]: 0.18 [0.10; 0.18] vs 0.30 [0.18; 0.30] logMAR; P < .001). The efficacy and safety indexes were 0.98 ± 0.09 and 1.01 ± 0.06, respectively. A total of 93.3% of eyes were within the 0.50 D range in postoperative MRSE. Visual dysphotopsia was worse in patients with both eyes operated on, although the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that after refractive lens exchange, patients with emmetropia and presbyopia who received a trifocal IOL in one or both eyes achieved good UNVA, UIVA, and UDVA. Regarding near binocular visual acuity, results were better for patients who underwent surgery on both eyes than for those who underwent surgery on one eye. Regarding binocular intermediate visual acuity, patients aged younger than 55 years with both lenses replaced had better results than those 55 years or older with only one lens replaced. However, no significant differences were observed in UDVA or patient satisfaction. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(12):817-824.].

Efficacy and Safety of Surgically Managed Late Traumatic LASIK Flap Displacements in a Study of 66 Cases.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy in the management of flap displacement after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and subsequent complications. METHODS: This was a retrospective study performed using data recorded at the center's database from October 2002 to August 2021. Efficacy and safety were both converted to binary outcomes (loss of one or more lines and no change or gain in lines of visual acuity). The effects of time from surgery to complication and from complication to repair were assessed and the odds ratios and probabilities were calculated. The same procedure was applied to investigate the effect of these temporal variables on complications. RESULTS: A total of 66 eyes with late traumatic LASIK flap displacements were studied. Efficacy remained unchanged in 48 patients (64 eyes, 75%), and safety remained unchanged in 53 patients (59 eyes, 90%). Sixty-six patients (64 eyes, 100%) achieved visual acuity values of 20/40 and 45 patients (64 eyes, 70.3%) achieved values of 20/20. The flap displacement was resolved in the first 24 hours (SD ± 0.1 days). Surgery was performed in 58 patients (65 eyes, 90%). Epithelial ingrowth was the most frequent complication. Patients who underwent surgery tended not to lose lines (P = .05). The risk of developing epithelial ingrowth increases with time after LASIK surgery until traumatic flap displacement (odds ratio: 1.001; P < .001). The prevalence of dislocation during the study period was 0.012%. CONCLUSIONS: Visual safety values were favorable after resolution of the flap complication. Immediate surgical management leads to better visual efficacy, and the time between LASIK and trauma increases the risk of epithelial ingrowth after flap displacement. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(4):270-276.].

Laser in Situ Keratomileusis and Surface Ablation in Breastfeeding Patients.

PURPOSE: Our objectives were to determine the anatomical and functional (visual and refractive) outcomes of corneal refractive surgery during breastfeeding and to compare the results with those of women who stopped breastfeeding at least 3 months before the procedure. We also evaluated predictability, safety, and efficacy indexes; number of retreatments; and adverse effects reported in babies. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective, interventional case series review of patients who were breastfeeding and who underwent laser in situ keratomileusis or surface ablation (photorefractive keratectomy) from September 11, 2002 to December 12, 2017 (group 1, n = 142 eyes in the case group). Patients were compared with women who stopped breastfeeding at least 3 months before the procedure from September 11, 2002 to December 12, 2017 (group 2, n = 95 eyes in the control group). A total of 168 women (237 eyes) were included. Patients were incorporated consecutively. Functional (visual and refractive) and anatomical outcomes are described. RESULTS: No significant intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded. There were no significant differences between the groups in visual acuity, postoperative spherical equivalent, efficacy index, predictability, safety index, or retreatments. No infants experienced adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy can be performed effectively and safely in breastfeeding women.

Outcomes of Flap Lift Laser In Situ Keratomileusis Enhancements in a Large Patient Population: Does Application of a Bandage Contact Lens Affect Incidence of Epithelial Ingrowth?

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of corneal epithelial ingrowth (EIG) and the visual outcomes of enhancement with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) by flap lift when a bandage soft contact lens (CL) was fitted after the procedure and when it was not. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective, interventional case series in which all patients who underwent LASIK enhancement from January 2005 to January 2015 were included consecutively. Patients were grouped depending on whether a bandage CL was fitted after re-treatment by flap lift (group 1) or not (group 2). RESULTS: A total of 16,702 eyes from 12,485 patients were included. There were statistically significant differences between the groups regarding corrected distance visual acuity (better in group 1) and safety index (better in group 2) although these were not clinically relevant. The incidence of EIG was 0.58% in group 1 and 0.55% in group 2 although, again, the difference was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: We found no relevant differences in LASIK enhancement between patients who received a bandage CL and those who did not regarding the incidence of EIG and visual outcomes.

Myopic LASIK in psychiatric patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the surgical results obtained in patients with psychiatric disorders who underwent myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. (LASIK). METHODS: Retrospective study of 156 eyes of 82 patients who underwent LASIK to correct a myopic spherical equivalent (SE) at Clínica Baviera-Instituto Oftalmológico Europeo, Bilbao, Spain. All procedures were performed with the Technolas Keracor 217 Z excimer laser. Patients had a preoperative diagnosis of bipolar disorder (79 eyes of 42 patients), schizophrenia (61 eyes of 32 patients), or obsessive-compulsive disorder (16 eyes of 8 patients). Before surgery, the average sphere of the series was -3.92 ± 2.24 D in the first group, -3.45 ± 2.03 D in the second group, and -3.39 ± 1.97 D in the third group. We surveyed the patients to analyze subjective assessment from the patient's perspective. RESULTS: At the last available visit after treatment, we obtained an SE of ±0.50 D in 85.71% of eyes with bipolar disorder, 88.52% of eyes with schizophrenia, and 93.75% of eyes with obsessive-compulsive disorder. The efficacy index was 1.00 ± 0.20 in the first group, 1.03 ± 0.21 in the second group, and 1.00 ± 0.07 in the third group. No eye lost 2 lines or more of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients with compensated psychiatric disorders, of which the surgeon was aware, achieved excellent results after surgery, with no remarkable complications. Patients tolerated the procedures well and were satisfied.

Myopic LASIK and LASEK in patients with preoperative mean central keratometry ≥47.50 D.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether patients who undergo myopic LASIK or laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) with preoperative central keratometry ≥47.50 diopters (D) are at higher risk for developing corneal ectasia postoperatively. METHODS: Records of 32 patients (54 eyes) who underwent myopic LASIK or LASEK between May 2002 and July 2005 with preoperative mean central keratometry ≥47.50 D were retrospectively reviewed. Patients eligible for the study were offered free follow-up. Last follow-up was at least 3 years after surgery. All procedures were performed with the Technolas Keracor 217z excimer laser (Bausch & Lomb). RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (40 eyes) had LASIK and 8 patients (14 eyes) had LASEK. At last follow-up, no patient had developed ectasia. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients with preoperative central keratometry ≥47.50 D as the only parameter evaluated should not be excluded from corneal refractive surgery due to increased risk of postoperative ectasia. However, when this preoperative finding is accompanied by other topographic abnormalities, treatment options should be carefully evaluated.