Nominal and achieved stromal ablation depth after myopic transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy: implications for residual stromal thickness calculation.

IF 4.1 1区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Eye and Vision Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1186/s40662-024-00404-2
Yue Feng, Tore Arnstein Nitter, Xu Liu, Aleksandar Stojanovic
{"title":"Nominal and achieved stromal ablation depth after myopic transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy: implications for residual stromal thickness calculation.","authors":"Yue Feng, Tore Arnstein Nitter, Xu Liu, Aleksandar Stojanovic","doi":"10.1186/s40662-024-00404-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The primary objective of this investigation was to compare the nominal central ablation depth with the achieved central corneal stromal ablation depth after StreamLight transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) for myopia with WaveLight® laser by Alcon Laboratories, TX, USA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This ambispective study encompassed a retrospective analysis of 40 eyes who underwent treatment for myopia and astigmatism, followed by a prospective examination conducted 6-9 months postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative Avanti spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT; Optovue Inc., CA, USA) provided stromal and epithelial thickness maps. The difference between pre- and postoperative central stromal thicknesses at the corneal vertex was used to calculate the achieved stromal thickness ablation depth. This value was then compared with the corresponding central nominal depth on the laser ablation planning map.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 40 eyes (OD/OS:18/22) of 40 patients (31.4 ± 9.2 years) were available for evaluation. The mean treated spherical equivalent was - 2.98 ± 1.46 D. The mean nominal and achieved central stromal ablation depths were 51.22 µm and 59.67 μm, respectively, showing a mean stromal excessive ablation of 16.50%. The mean pre- and postoperative central epithelial thicknesses were 53.74 μm and 59.31 μm, respectively, showing a mean postoperative thickness increase of 10.46%. This increase in the epithelial thickness rendered the mean postoperative pachymetry reduction to 54.11 μm, only 2.33% greater than the mean nominal ablation depth.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study revealed a central stromal ablation 16.50% greater than the nominal ablation depth. This excessive stromal removal was largely compensated for by the increase in epithelial thickness, resulting in a mean difference between the nominal ablation depth and the achieved central corneal pachymetry reduction of only 2.33%. This significant excessive central stromal ablation must be taken into consideration in the calculation of the residual stromal thickness.</p>","PeriodicalId":12194,"journal":{"name":"Eye and Vision","volume":"11 1","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367754/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye and Vision","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40662-024-00404-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The primary objective of this investigation was to compare the nominal central ablation depth with the achieved central corneal stromal ablation depth after StreamLight transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) for myopia with WaveLight® laser by Alcon Laboratories, TX, USA.

Methods: This ambispective study encompassed a retrospective analysis of 40 eyes who underwent treatment for myopia and astigmatism, followed by a prospective examination conducted 6-9 months postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative Avanti spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT; Optovue Inc., CA, USA) provided stromal and epithelial thickness maps. The difference between pre- and postoperative central stromal thicknesses at the corneal vertex was used to calculate the achieved stromal thickness ablation depth. This value was then compared with the corresponding central nominal depth on the laser ablation planning map.

Results: A total of 40 eyes (OD/OS:18/22) of 40 patients (31.4 ± 9.2 years) were available for evaluation. The mean treated spherical equivalent was - 2.98 ± 1.46 D. The mean nominal and achieved central stromal ablation depths were 51.22 µm and 59.67 μm, respectively, showing a mean stromal excessive ablation of 16.50%. The mean pre- and postoperative central epithelial thicknesses were 53.74 μm and 59.31 μm, respectively, showing a mean postoperative thickness increase of 10.46%. This increase in the epithelial thickness rendered the mean postoperative pachymetry reduction to 54.11 μm, only 2.33% greater than the mean nominal ablation depth.

Conclusions: The study revealed a central stromal ablation 16.50% greater than the nominal ablation depth. This excessive stromal removal was largely compensated for by the increase in epithelial thickness, resulting in a mean difference between the nominal ablation depth and the achieved central corneal pachymetry reduction of only 2.33%. This significant excessive central stromal ablation must be taken into consideration in the calculation of the residual stromal thickness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
近视经皮层光屈光性角膜切除术后的标称基质消融深度和达到的基质消融深度:对计算残余基质厚度的影响。
背景:本研究的主要目的是比较美国德克萨斯州爱尔康实验室使用WaveLight®激光进行StreamLight经上皮层光屈光性角膜移植术(tPRK)治疗近视后的名义中央消融深度和实际中央角膜基质消融深度:这项前瞻性研究对接受近视和散光治疗的 40 只眼睛进行了回顾性分析,并在术后 6-9 个月进行了前瞻性检查。术前和术后的 Avanti 光谱域光学相干断层扫描(SD-OCT;Optovue Inc.术前和术后角膜顶点中央基质厚度之差被用来计算达到的基质厚度消融深度。然后将该值与激光消融规划图上相应的中心标称深度进行比较:共有 40 名患者(31.4 ± 9.2 岁)的 40 只眼睛(OD/OS:18/22)接受了评估。治疗后的平均球面等值为 - 2.98 ± 1.46 D。平均标称和达到的中央基质消融深度分别为 51.22 µm 和 59.67 μm,显示平均基质过度消融率为 16.50%。术前和术后中央上皮平均厚度分别为 53.74 μm 和 59.31 μm,术后平均厚度增加了 10.46%。上皮厚度的增加使术后平均厚度测量值减少到 54.11 μm,仅比平均名义消融深度大 2.33%:研究显示,中央基质消融深度比标称消融深度大 16.50%。上皮厚度的增加在很大程度上弥补了基质去除过多的问题,因此,名义消融深度与达到的角膜中央厚度减少量之间的平均差异仅为 2.33%。在计算残余基质厚度时,必须考虑到这一明显的过度中央基质消融。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Eye and Vision
Eye and Vision OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
89
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Eye and Vision is an open access, peer-reviewed journal for ophthalmologists and visual science specialists. It welcomes research articles, reviews, methodologies, commentaries, case reports, perspectives and short reports encompassing all aspects of eye and vision. Topics of interest include but are not limited to: current developments of theoretical, experimental and clinical investigations in ophthalmology, optometry and vision science which focus on novel and high-impact findings on central issues pertaining to biology, pathophysiology and etiology of eye diseases as well as advances in diagnostic techniques, surgical treatment, instrument updates, the latest drug findings, results of clinical trials and research findings. It aims to provide ophthalmologists and visual science specialists with the latest developments in theoretical, experimental and clinical investigations in eye and vision.
期刊最新文献
Levodopa is associated with reduced development of new-onset geographic atrophy in patients with age-related macular degeneration. A review of the application of in-vivo confocal microscopy on conjunctival diseases. Comparison of bilateral implantation of monofocal intraocular lenses with enhanced intermediate function targeting with - 2.00 D and emmetropia in moderate to high myopic Asian patients. Visual and patient reported outcomes provided by a refractive multifocal intraocular lens based on continuous transitional focus. Inflammatory and genomic interactions within keratoconus susceptible patients: a nationwide registered case-control study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1