Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and scanning laser ophthalmoscopy].

Authors: E M, Hoffmann; H B, Dick; F H, Grus; N, Pfeiffer;

[Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and scanning laser ophthalmoscopy].

Abstract

To determine the influence of Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) on the measurements of retinal thickness and optic nerve head topography using the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA).RTA measurements were performed before and after LASIK. Forty-eight eyes of 25 healthy subjects were included. Mean age was 40.0+/-10.6 years. Mean preoperative refractive error (spherical equivalent) was -3.3+/-3.6 dpt, and 0.2+/-0.9dpt postoperatively. Correlation between ablation depth and duration and change of retinal thickness postoperatively was performed. All patients received a pachymetry preoperatively.Postoperatively, mean retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (MRNFL) and cross sectional area (RNFL cross section area) significantly decreased after LASIK (MRNFL preop: 0.18 mm, postop: 0.11 mm, P =0.026, RNFL cross section preop: 1.17 mm(2), postop: 0.71 mm(2), P =0.015). Ablation depth revealed a significant correlation with changes in retinal thickness measurements postoperatively (Delta MRNFL: Ablation depth, P =0.001, r=-0.5). Duration of the ablation was not significantly correlated to the MRNFL measurements postoperatively (P =0.27, r=-0.08). No correlation was found between the central corneal thickness and the change in retinal thickness after LASIK (P =0.51).Due to changes in corneal architecture after LASIK, measurements using RTA reveal a decrease in MRNFL and RNFL cross section area. These changes are likely artifacts. Further studies with a longer follow-up are desirable.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Male, Microscopy, Confocal, Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ, Reproducibility of Results, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Refractive Errors, Sensitivity and Specificity, Refractive Surgical Procedures, Treatment Outcome, Humans, Female, Retinoscopy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!