6533b85bfe1ef96bd12bbf3d
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Implantable collamer lens and femtosecond laser for myopia: comparison using an adaptive optics visual simulator.
Teresa Ferrer-blascoCésar Albarrán-diegoSantiago García-lázaroCari Pérez-vivesRobert Montés-micósubject
Point spread functionAdultLaser de excimerPhakic Intraocular LensesVisual acuityVisual acuitymedicine.medical_treatmentKeratomileusis Laser In SituLentes intraoculares; Sensibilidade de contrasteVisual AcuityCeratomileuse assistida por excimer laser in situ/métodosKeratomileusisPhakic intraocular lensMyopia/surgeryPupilKeratomileusis laser in situ/methodsContrast SensitivityYoung Adultlcsh:OphthalmologyLens Implantation IntraocularOptical transfer functionmedicineMyopiaHumansComputer SimulationContrast sensitivityAdaptive opticsSimulationPhysicsLasers excimer/therapeutic useAcuidade visualAberrometryAccommodation OcularGeneral MedicineOphthalmologyTreatment Outcomelcsh:RE1-994Lenses intraocularMiopia/cirurgiaOptometrySpatial frequencymedicine.symptomdescription
Purpose: To compare optical and visual quality of implantable collamer lens (ICL) implantation and femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (F-LASIK) for myopia. Methods: The CRX1 adaptive optics visual simulator (Imagine Eyes, Orsay, France) was used to simulate the wavefront aberration pattern after the two surgical procedures for -3-diopter (D) and -6-D myopia. Visual acuity at different contrasts and contrast sensitivities at 10, 20, and 25 cycles/degree (cpd) were measured for 3-mm and 5-mm pupils. The modulation transfer function (MTF) and point spread function (PSF) were calculated for 5-mm pupils. Results: F-LASIK MTF was worse than ICL MTF, which was close to diffraction-limited MTF. ICL cases showed less spread out of PSF than F-LASIK cases. ICL cases showed better visual acuity values than F-LASIK cases for all pupils, contrasts, and myopic treatments (p0.05). For -6-D myopia, however, statistically significant differences in contrast sensitivities were found for both pupils for all evaluated spatial frequencies (p0,05). Por outro lado, para -6 D, diferenças estatisticamente significativas na sensibilidade ao contraste foram encontrados para ambas as pupilas e todas as frequências espaciais avaliadas (p<0,05). Sensibilidade ao contraste foi melhor após o implante da ICL que após o F-LASIK. Conclusões: ICL e F-LASIK proporcionam uma boa qualidade óptica e visual, embora a ICL oferece melhores resultados de MTF, PSF, acuidade visual e sensibilidade ao contraste, especialmente para grandes erros de refração e tamanhos de pupila. Estes resultados estão relacionados ao procedimento F-LASIK que induz maiores aberrações de alta ordem.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2014-04-01 | Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia |