Cross Sectional Analysis of Impact of Seasonal Changes on Excimer Laser Ablation Performance on Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA).

Seasonal changes and varying degree of corneal hydration has been linked to excimer laser corneal ablation rates. The use of PMMA as a calibration material in refractive lasers is well established. However, PMMA ablation may be equally affected by seasonal variations in temperature and humidity, in turn affecting the calibration process. The aim of this work is to analyze the effect of seasonal changes in PMMA performance using SCHWIND AMARIS laser system. PET and PMMA ablations conducted in climate-controlled environment with 826 consecutive AMARIS systems manufactured over 6 years were retrospectively analyzed. Lasers were stratified depending on seasons and months of the year. Metrics like single laser pulse fluence, nominal number of laser pulses, mean performance, standard deviation, and technical performance of system were compared to global average values. Cyclic winter-summer variation was confirmed with seasons winter and summer showing statistically significant variations with respect to global values. Metric technical performance showed deeper PMMA ablation performance in summertime, with maximum seasonal deviation of 6%. Results were consistently confirmed in seasonal as well as monthly analyses. These findings could help minimize variance among laser systems by implementing compensation factors depending on seasons such that laser systems installed worldwide follow the same trend line of variation.

Twelve-month outcomes of a new refractive lenticular extraction procedure

Background: To evaluate the 12-month refractive and visual outcomes of Small Incision Guided Human-cornea Treatment (SmartSight®, SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions, Kleinostheim, Germany) in the treatment of myopia corrections with low to moderate astigmatism with the use of a new femtosecond laser system.Methods221 eyes of 114 patients consecutively treated with SmartSight lenticule extraction were assessed. The mean age of the patients was 28±6 years at the time of treatment with a mean spherical equivalent refraction of -6.26±2.17D and mean astigmatism of 0.92±0.68D. Monocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) were assessed pre- and post-operatively. Refractive changes have been determined in terms of changes in refraction, as well as changes in keratometric readings. The changes in central epithelial thickness have been determined.ResultsAt twelve months post-operatively, mean UDVA was 20/21±2. Spherical equivalent showed a residual refraction of +0.48±0.31D with refractive astigmatism of 0.13±0.18D postoperatively. There was a slight decrease of -0.1 Snellen lines at 12-months follow-up. The same correction was determined using changes in refraction, as well as changes in keratometric readings. The central epithelial thickness increased by +3±2µm. Spherical equivalent correction within ±0.50D was achieved in 199 eyes (90%), and cylindrical correction in 221 (100%). Preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 20/20 or better in 213 eyes (96%), and postoperative uncorrected (UDVA) was 20/20 or better in 205 eyes (93%). No eye had lost two or more Snellen lines of CDVA.ConclusionsMyopic astigmatism correction with SmartSight provided good results for efficacy, safety, predictability, and visual outcomes at the twelve months of follow up. The central epithelial thickness barely increased by 3±2µm. (AU)

Comparing the vision quality using double-pass technique in eyes with corrected refractive errors and emmetropic eyes / Comparação da qualidade óptica usando a técnica de dupla passagem em olhos com erros de refração corrigidos e olhos emetrópicos

ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the vision quality by measuring the objective light scatter index and objective optical quality parameters (Strehl Ratio and Modulation Transfer Function) in patients with emmetropia and ametropia. Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional study included 408 eyes. The ametropic group comprised of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity of 0.0 logMAR or better and present at least a refractive error of ≥0.25 D. Patients underwent slit lamp examination, visual acuity, refraction, and vision quality using the HD Analyzer. Results: The mean objective light scatter indices were 0.62 ± 0.63, 0.77 ± 0.70, 0.74 ± 0.30, 0.93 ± 0.55, and 0.85 ± 0.61, and mean Strehl Ratio and Modulation Transfer Function scores were 38.17 ± 10.4, 37.37 ± 10.06, 29.84 ± 9.71, 33.2 ± 12.11, and 33.13 ± 10.09 in emmetropes, myopia, hyperopia, spherical equivalent of ≥0, and spherical equivalent of <0, respectively. Differences in all variables were significant between emmetropic and corrected hyperopic and between spherical equivalent of ≥0, and spherical equivalent of <0 eyes (p<0.05). Conclusion: In spectacle-corrected conditions (with trial frames), emmetropic and simple myopic eyes had significantly better vision quality compared to hyperopic and astigmatic eyes. The clinical significance of these results should be investigated in further studies.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade óptica medindo o índice de dispersão objetiva de luz e os parâmetros de qualidade óptica objetiva (Razão de Strehl e Função de Transferência de Modulação) em indivíduos com emetropia e ametropia. Métodos: Estudo prospectivo, transversal, incluindo 408 olhos. O grupo ametrópico era de olhos com melhor acuidade visual corrigida de 0,0 logMAR ou melhor e apresentando, pelo menos, um erro refrativo de 0,25 D ou mais. Os pacientes foram submetidos a exame com lâmpada de fenda, acuidade visual, refração e qualidade óptica com o HD Analyzer. Resultados: O índice de dispersão objetiva de luz médio foi de 0,62 ± 0,63, 0,77 ± 0,70, 0,74 ± 0,30, 0,93 ± 0,55, 0,85 ± 0,61 e a média da Razão de Strehl e de Função de Transferência de Modulação foram 38,17 ± 10,4, 37,37 ± 10,06, 29,84 ± 9,71, 33,2 ± 12,11 e 33,13 ± 10,09 em olhos emetrópicos, míopes, hipermétropes, equivalente esférico ≥0 e equivalente esférico <0 respectivamente. Foram encontradas diferenças significativas em todas as variáveis entre olhos emetrópicos e com hipermetropia corrigida, equivalente esférico ≥ 0 e equivalente esférico <0 (p<0,05). Conclusão: Em condições com lentes corrigidas (com armações de prova), os olhos emetrópicos e com miopia simples apresentaram qualidade óptica significativamente melhor em comparação com os olhos hipermétropes e astigmáticos. O significado clínico destes resultados deve ser estudado posteriormente.

Comparing the vision quality using double-pass technique in eyes with corrected refractive errors and emmetropic eyes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the vision quality by measuring the objective light scatter index and objective optical quality parameters (Strehl Ratio and Modulation Transfer Function) in patients with emmetropia and ametropia. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study included 408 eyes. The ametropic group comprised of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity of 0.0 logMAR or better and present at least a refractive error of ≥0.25 D. Patients underwent slit lamp examination, visual acuity, refraction, and vision quality using the HD Analyzer. RESULTS: The mean objective light scatter indices were 0.62 ± 0.63, 0.77 ± 0.70, 0.74 ± 0.30, 0.93 ± 0.55, and 0.85 ± 0.61, and mean Strehl Ratio and Modulation Transfer Function scores were 38.17 ± 10.4, 37.37 ± 10.06, 29.84 ± 9.71, 33.2 ± 12.11, and 33.13 ± 10.09 in emmetropes, myopia, hyperopia, spherical equivalent of ≥0, and spherical equivalent of <0, respectively. Differences in all variables were significant between emmetropic and corrected hyperopic and between spherical equivalent of ≥0, and spherical equivalent of <0 eyes (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: In spectacle-corrected conditions (with trial frames), emmetropic and simple myopic eyes had significantly better vision quality compared to hyperopic and astigmatic eyes. The clinical significance of these results should be investigated in further studies.