Volume : 08, Issue : 11, November – 2021
Title:
39.EFFICIENCY OF CORNEAL REFRACTIVE SURGERY, COMPLICATIONS
Authors :
Dr. Dina Abdulmannan
Abstract :
Ever since femtosecond lasers were first introduced into refractive surgery, the ultimate goal has been to create an intrastromal lenticule that can then be manually removed as a single piece thereby circumventing the need for incremental photoablation by an excimer laser. We conducted a search through the electronic databases, using Mesh terms, for all reagents studies that were published concerning corneal refractive surgeries. Currently, refractive surgeons are in between many choices in different types, given the myriad of available refractive corneal procedures. However, each treatment necessitates careful considerations of its risks and benefits, however a number of studies have demonstrated a lower reduction and faster recovery of corneal sensation after SMILE than LASIK. Some studies have also used confocal microscopy to demonstrate a lower decrease in subbasal nerve fiber density after SMILE than LASIK.
Cite This Article:
Please cite this article in press Dina Abdulmannan, Efficiency Of Corneal Refractive Surgery, Complications., Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2021; 08(11).
Number of Downloads : 10
References:
1. Pan C-W, Ramamurthy D, Saw S-M. Worldwide prevalence and risk factors for myopia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012;32:3–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00884.x.
2. Guo H, Hosseini-Moghaddam SM, Hodge W. Corneal biomechanical properties after SMILE versus FLEX, LASIK, LASEK, or PRK: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Ophthalmol. 2019;19(1):167. Published 2019 Aug 1. doi:10.1186/s12886-019-1165-3
3. He TG, Shi XR. Clinical study of ultra-thin flap LASIK and LASEK for the treatment of high myopia with thin cornea. Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology 2006;42(6):517‐21.
4. Bailey MD, Zadnik K. Outcomes of LASIK for myopia with FDA-approved lasers. Cornea. 2007;26:246–254. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e318033dbf0.
5. Manche EE, Carr JD, Haw WW, Hersh PS. Excimer laser refractive surgery. West J Med. 1998;169(1):30-38.
6. Al‐Fayez M. Long‐term results of LASEK vs. LASIK for mild to moderate myopia. American Academy of Ophthalmology; 2008 Nov 8‐11; Atlanta (GA). Atlanta (GA), 2008:247.
7. Schiotz H (1885): Ein Fall von hochgradigem Hornhautastigmatism nach Staarextraction: Besserrung auf operativem Wege. Arch Augenheille 15: 178–781.
8. Sato T, Akiyama K & Shibata H (1953): A new surgical approach to myopia. Am J Ophthalmol 36: 823–829.
9. Lee YY, Lo CT, Sheu SJ & Lin JL (2013): What factors are associated with myopia in young adults? A survey study in Taiwan Military Conscripts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54: 1026–1033.
10. Azar DT, Azar NF, Brodie SE, Hoffer KJ, Korn TS, Mauger TF, Strauss L & Thall EH (2013): Clinical Optics, Section 3. American Academy of Ophthalmology, San Francisco, CA, USA 88.
11. Steinert RF, Hersh PS. Spherical and aspherical photorefractive keratectomy and laser in-situ keratomileusis for moderate to high myopia: two prospective, randomized clinical trials. Summit technology PRK-LASIK study group. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1998;96:197-227.
12. Seiler T, Kahle G, Kriegerowski M. Excimer laser (193 nm) myopic keratomileusis in sighted and blind human eyes. Refract Corneal Surg 1990;6(3):165-73.
13. McDonald MB, Liu JC, Byrd TJ, et al. Central photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. Partially sighted and normally sighted eyes. Ophthalmology 1991.
14. Doane JF, Cauble JE, Rickstrew JJ, Tuckfield JQ. Small Incision Lenticule Extraction SMILE – The Future of Refractive Surgery is Here. Mo Med. 2018;115(1):82-84.
15. Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes. Eye Vis [Internet]. 2014;1(1):1–12.
16. Sutton G, Lawless M, Hodge C. Laser in situ keratomileusis in 2012: a review. Clin Exp Optom. 2014;97:18–29. doi: 10.1111/cxo.12075.
17. Bao F, Geraghty B, Wang Q, Elsheikh A. Consideration of corneal biomechanics in the diagnosis and management of keratoconus: is it important? Eye Vis. 2016;3. 10.1186/s40662-016-0048-4.
18. Damgaard IB, Reffat M, Hjortdal J. Review of corneal biomechanical properties following LASIK and SMILE for myopia and myopic astigmatism. Open Ophthalmol J. 2018;12:164–174. doi: 10.2174/1874364101812010164.
19. Jędzierowska M, Koprowski R. Novel dynamic corneal response parameters in a practice use: a critical review doi:10.1186/s12938-019-0636-3.
20. Peña-García P, Peris-Martínez C, Abbouda A, Ruiz-Moreno JM. Detection of subclinical keratoconus through non-contact tonometry and the use of discriminant biomechanical functions. J Biomech. 2016;49:353–363. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.12.031.