Comparison of the Flap Complication Rate Between Microkeratomes for LASIK

Jee Yun Ahn; Ji Won Kwon; Sang Mok Lee; Won Ryang Wee; Jin Hak Lee; Young Keun Han

doi:10.3341/jkos.2008.49.9.1425

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.49(9) > 1008072

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Ahn, Kwon, Lee, Wee, Lee, and Han: Comparison of the Flap Complication Rate Between Microkeratomes for LASIK

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2008;49(9):1425-1430.

Published online: 7 September 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2008.49.9.1425

Comparison of the Flap Complication Rate Between Microkeratomes for LASIK

Jee Yun Ahn, M.D.^1,², Ji Won Kwon, M.D., Ph.D.^1,^2,³, Sang Mok Lee, M.D.^1,^2,⁴, Won Ryang Wee, M.D., Ph.D.^1,², Jin Hak Lee, M.D., Ph.D.^1,^2,⁵, Young Keun Han, M.D., Ph.D.^1,^2,⁴

¹Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine^¹, Seoul, Korea

²Seoul Artificial Eye Center, Clinical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital^², Seoul, Korea

³Seoul National University Hospital, Health Care System Gangnam Center, Healthcare Research Institute, Seoul, Korea

⁴Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Korea

⁵Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital^⁵, Seongnam, Korea

Address reprint requests to Young Keun Han, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital #425 Shindaebang2-dong, Dongjag-gu, Seoul 156-707, Korea Tel: 82-2-840-2175, Fax: 82-2-831-0714, E-mail: eye129@paran.com

Received 7 July 2008 Accepted 27 May 2008

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

To compare intraoperative and postoperative flap complication rate between the Hansatome Excellus and Zyoptix XP microkeratomes for LASIK surgery.

Methods

The intra- and post-operative flap complication rate, in 323 eyes of 167 patients operated on using the Hansatome microkeratome were compared with 260 eyes of 132 patients that were operated on using the Zyoptix XP microkeratome.

Results

The Hansatome group showed an intraoperative complication incidence of 2.7% compared to 0.4% for the Zyoptix XP group ( p<0.05), but the incidence of postoperative complication was 2.7% in the Zyoptix XP group compared to 0.6% in the Hansatome group ( p>0.05). There was no incidence of visually significant complications in either group.

Conclusions

The Zyoptix XP showed a significantly decreased intraoperative flap complication rate compared to the Hansatome Excellus microkeratome. The preoperative K value is an important factor for safe LASIK.

Go to :

Keywords: Flap complication, Hansatome Excellus, LASIK, Microkeratome, Zyoptix XP

References

1. Davidorf JM, Zaldivar R, Oscherow S. Results and complications of laser in situ keratomileusis by experienced surgeons. J Refract Surg. 1998; 14:114–22.

2. Spadea L, Palmieri G, Mosca L. . Iatrogenic keratectasia following laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg. 2002; 18:475–80.

3. Haw WW, Manche EE. Iatrogenic keratectasia after a deep primary keratotomy during laser in situ keratomileusis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001; 132:920–1.

4. Potgieter FJ, Roberts C, Cox IG. . Prediction of flap response. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31:106–14.

5. Guirao A. Theoretical elastic response of the cornea to refractive surgery: risk factors for keratectasia. J Refract Surg. 2005; 21:176–85.

6. Wilson SE, Ambrosio R Jr. Laser in situ keratomileusis- induced neurotrophic epitheliopathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001; 132:405–6.

7. Assil KK, McCall T. Temporal hinge laser in situ keratomileusis: maximizing treatable stromal bed area. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31:1139–44.

8. Donnenfeld ED, Ehrenhaus M, Solomon R. . Effect of hinge width on corneal sensation and dry eye after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004; 30:290–7.

9. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, Merchea M. Comparative performance of the Zyoptix XP and Hansatome zero-compression microkeratomes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:1386–91.

10. Cha DW, Ahn BC. Laser in situ keratomileusis to treat low to moderate myopia. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1997; 38:715–20.

11. Tchah HW, Kim SJ. The clinical results of LASIK in high myopia: one-year follow-up. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2000; 41:894–901.

12. Yoon JT, Lee GJ, Tchah HW. Flap complications of LASIK. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2000; 41:1146–50.

13. Jacobs JM, Taravella MJ. Incidence of intraoperative flap complications in laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002; 28:23–8.

14. Stulting RD, Carr JD, Thompson KP. . Complications of laser in situ keratomileusis for the correction of myopia. Ophthalmology. 1999; 106:13–20.

15. Cho HS, Tchah HW. Incidence of flap complications of Hansatome in laser in situ keratomileusis. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2003; 44:692–8.

16. Walker MB, Wilson SE. Lower intraoperative flap compli- cation rate with the Hansatome microkeratome compared to the Automated Corneal Shaper. J Refract Surg. 2000; 16:79–82.

17. Kim MJ, Jeong JH, Choi CY, Tchah HW. Clinical evaluation of new microkeratome. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2006; 47:1387–93.

18. Tham VM, Maloney RK. Microkeratome complications of laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology. 2000; 107:920–4.

19. Wilson SE. LASIK: management of common complications. Laser in situ keratomileusis. Cornea. 1998; 17:459–67.

20. Kohnen T, Terzi E, Mirshahi A, Buhren J. Intraindividual comparison of epithelial defects during laser in situ kerato- mileusis using standard and zero-compression Hansatome microkeratome heads. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004; 30:123–6.

21. Polk EE, Wexler SA, Kymes S. Incidence of corneal epithelial defects with the standard and zero-compression Hansatome microkeratomes. J Refract Surg. 2005; 21:359–64.

22. Watanabe H, Shigeru S, Maedal N. . Bilateral corneal infection as a complication of laser in situ keratomileusis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997; 11:1593.

Go to :

Figure 1.

Slitlamp photographs show the button hole at the center of the flap with Hansatome Excellus (A) and epithelial ingrowth at postoperative 1 week (B).

undefined

Figure 2.

Slitlamp photograph shows the free cap with Hansatome Excellus at postoperative 1 day.

undefined

Figure 3.

Slitlamp phtograph shows the free cap with Zyoptix XP at postoperative 1 day.

undefined

Table 1.

Preoperative demographics of the study groups

	Hansatome Excellus	Zyoptix XP
No. of eyes	323	260
Mean age (years)	29.3±5.9	26.9±4.5
Male:Female	48:119	35:97
Mean preoperative SE∗ (D)	-4.6±1.7	-6.3±1.8
Mean K^† value	43.4±1.4	43.5±1.1
Mean RSB^‡ thickness (µm)	305.5±28.1	338.5±28.7

^∗ SE=Spherical equivalent

^† K=keratometry

^‡ RSB=residual stromal bed.

Table 2.

Comparison of intraoperative complication incidences between 2 groups

Intraoperative complications	Hansatome Excellus		Zyoptix XP
Intraoperative complications	Intraoperative complications	No.	%	No.	%
Button hole	1	0.3
Free cap	1	0.3	1	0.4
Irregular flap	5	1.5
Focal thin flap	2	0.6
Incomplete flap
Epithelial defect
Flap severing
Total	9	2.7	1	0.4

Table 3.

Comparison of postoperative complication incidences between 2 groups

Postoperative complications	Hansatome Excellus		Zyoptix XP
Postoperative complications	Postoperative complications	No.	%	No.	%
Epithelial ingrowth	1	0.3
Diffuse lamellar keratitis
Wrinkling	1	0.3	7	2.7
Total	2	0.6	7	2.7

TOOLS

Similar articles