Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
OPD Aberrometric Evaluation of Two Ablation Algorithms: OPA vs CATz. Paolo Vinciguerra MD, Fabrizio I. Camesasca, MD, Silvia Trazza, Orthoptist The authors have no financial interest in the subject matter of this poster Istituto Clinico Humanitas Milano - Italy. [email protected]. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
OPD Aberrometric OPD Aberrometric Evaluation of Two Evaluation of Two
Ablation Algorithms: Ablation Algorithms: OPA vs CATzOPA vs CATz
Paolo Vinciguerra MD, Fabrizio I. Camesasca, MD, Paolo Vinciguerra MD, Fabrizio I. Camesasca, MD,
Silvia Trazza, OrthoptistSilvia Trazza, Orthoptist
The authors have no financial interest The authors have no financial interest in the subject matter of this posterin the subject matter of this poster
Istituto Clinico HumanitasIstituto Clinico HumanitasMilano - ItalyMilano - Italy
Ablation Algorhitms Ablation Algorhitms and Aberrationsand Aberrations
The quest for the best ablation profile in
surface excimer laser surgery
may be helped by appropriate
aberrometric analysis.
We used aberrometry to evaluate two different
ablation profiles provided by the Final Fit
software for the
NIDEK EC 5000 excimer laser.
Materials And Materials And MethodsMethods
• Four patients (mean age 31 ± 3 yrs) • Bilateral LASEK surgery for myopia• Evaluated preoperatively with the Nidek OPD aberrometer• In each patient:
• the eye with less aberration and topographical surface irregularities received treatment with the new Optimized Profile Ablation algorithm (OPA, Group A)• the fellow eye was treated with the CATz algorithm (Group B).
• Preoperative refraction and visual acuity were comparable within the two Groups:
• 0.93 ±0.10 with -3.75 ±0.71 D SE vs • 0.93 ±0.10 with -4.25 ± 1.03
ResultsResults Six months postoperatively:
• visual acuity was comparable• Group A, 1.0 with -0.06 ± 0.13 D SE• Group B, 0.98 ± 0.05 with -0.47 ± 0.33 D SE
• corneal curvature gradient was comparable• Group A 12.90 ± 8.56 • Group B 12.49 ± 5.03
• Zernike aberrations were significatively higher with OPA than with CATz.
Preoperative
DOMINATING EYE,LESS IRREGULARITIES
EYE TO BE TREATED
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @0
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @175
Pt n°1, age 33 yrs
Preoperative
DOMINATING EYE,LESS ABERRATIONS
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @0
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @175EYE TO BE TREATED
PrEOPERATIVE
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @175
0.8 -3.75sf -1.25 @0
EYE TO BE TREATED
3 mos after Surgery
Catz
vs
OPA
1.0 plano
1.0 plano
after Surgery (3 mos) wf /OPD /ho
1.0 plano
1.0 plano
Catz
vs
OPA
After Surgery (3 mos) internal OPD
1.0 plano
1.0 plano
Catz
vs
OPA
Catz
OPA
6 mos post1 mos post
1.0 plano
1.0 plano 1.0 plano
1.0 plano 14.82
15.64
CORNEAL CURVATURE GRADIENT MAP
Conclusions
Zernike Aberrations
UCVA & BSCVA POST SURGERY
OPA CATZ
Both ablation algorithms provided successful treatment, but aberrometric analysys failed to demonstrate any advantage of OPA vs CATz.
