Comparing wavefront-optimized, wavefront-guided and topography-guided laser vision correction: clinical outcomes using an objective decision tree. Issue 4 (July 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stonecipher, Karl; Parrish, Joseph; Stonecipher, Megan
• Is Part Of: Current opinion in ophthalmology. Volume 29:Issue 4(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-07
• Subjects: aberrometry -- astigmatism -- hyperopia -- laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis -- laser vision correction -- myopia -- topography; Ophthalmology -- Periodicals; Eye Diseases -- Indexes; Eye Diseases -- Periodicals; Review Literature -- Indexes; Review Literature -- Periodicals; Vision Disorders -- Indexes; Vision Disorders -- Periodicals; 617.7
• DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000495
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1040-8738

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose of review: This review is intended to update and educate the reader on the currently available options for laser vision correction, more specifically, laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK). In addition, some related clinical outcomes data from over 1000 cases performed over a 1-year are presented to highlight some differences between the various treatment profiles currently available including the rapidity of visual recovery. The cases in question were performed on the basis of a decision tree to segregate patients on the basis of anatomical, topographic and aberrometry findings; the decision tree was formulated based on the data available in some of the reviewed articles. Recent findings: Numerous recent studies reported in the literature provide data related to the risks and benefits of LASIK; alternatives to a laser refractive procedure are also discussed. The results from these studies have been used to prepare a decision tree to assist the surgeon in choosing the best option for the patient based on the data from several standard preoperative diagnostic tests. Summary: The data presented here should aid surgeons in understanding the effects of currently available LASIK treatment profiles. Surgeons should also be able to appreciate how the findings were used to create a decision tree to help choose the most appropriate treatment profile for patients. Finally, the retrospective evaluation of clinical outcomes based on the decision tree should provide surgeons with a realistic expectation for their own outcomes should they adopt such a decision tree in their own practice.