Application of Corvis ST to evaluate the effect of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery on corneal biomechanics

Wei,Yinjuan; Xu,Lingxiao; Song,Hui

doi:10.3892/etm.2017.4675

Application of Corvis ST to evaluate the effect of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery on corneal biomechanics

Authors:
- Yinjuan Wei
- Lingxiao Xu
- Hui Song
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Tianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tianjin Eye Institute, Clinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin 300020, P.R. China
Published online on: June 26, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4675
Pages: 1626-1632
Copyright: © Wei et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and phacoemulsification on corneal biomechanics using corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology. The medical records of 50 eyes from 50 patients who received phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation because of age-related factors between June 2014 and September 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. FLACS was used in 12 eyes (FLACS group), and conventional phacoemulsification in 38 eyes (PHACO group). The evaluation of corneal biomechanical parameters included the first/second applanation time (A-time1/A-time2), the first/second applanation length (A-length1/A-length2), corneal velocity during the first/second applanation moment (Vin/Vout), highest concavity time, highest concavity-radius (HC-radius), peak distance (PD), deformation amplitude (DA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and intraocular pressure (IOP). The differences in A-length1/A‑length2, IOP, CCT, PD, and DA were significant in the PHACO group between those before, 1 week after, and 1 month after surgery. No significant differences in corneal biomechanical parameters were found between those at 1 month after surgery and before surgery. There were significant differences in IOP and CCT in the FLACS group between those before, 1 week after, and 1 month after surgery. There were no significant differences in the other corneal biomechanical parameters. No significant differences were found in corneal biomechanical parameters between those 1 month after surgery and before surgery. There were significant differences in A-length1/A‑length2, CCT, PD, and DA between the two groups at 1 week after surgery. There were no significant differences in corneal biomechanical parameters between the two groups at 1 month after surgery. In conclusion, the effect of FLACS on corneal biomechanics is smaller than that of phacoemulsification. The corneal biomechanical parameters are restored to preoperative levels with the healing of the incision, and the reduction of swelling of the tissue near the incision.

View Figures

View References

1	Nagy Z, Takacs A, Filkorn T and Sarayba M: Initial clinical evaluation of an intraocular femtosecond laser in cataract surgery. J Refract Surg. 25:1053–1060. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Masket S, Sarayba M, Ignacio T and Fram N: Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract incisions: architectural stability and reproducibility. J Cataract Refract Surg. 36:1048–1049. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Hon Y and Lam AK: Corneal deformation measurement using Scheimpflug noncontact tonometry. Optom Vis Sci. 90:e1–e8. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Hayes S, Boote C, Lewis J, Sheppard J, Abahussin M, Quantock AJ, Purslow C, Votruba M and Meek KM: Comparative study of fibrillar collagen arrangement in the corneas of primates and other mammals. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 290:1542–1550. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Boote C, Hayes S, Abahussin M and Meek KM: Mapping collagen organization in the human cornea: left and right eyes are structurally distinct. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 47:901–908. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Meek KM and Boote C: The organization of collagen in the corneal stroma. Exp Eye Res. 78:503–512. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Aghamohammadzadeh H, Newton RH and Meek KM: X-ray scattering used to map the preferred collagen orientation in the human cornea and limbus. Structure. 12:249–256. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Brown NA and Sparrow JM: Control of astigmatism in cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol. 72:487–493. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Song X, Langenbucher A, Gatzioufas Z, Seitz B and El-Husseiny M: Effect of biometric characteristics on the change of biomechanical properties of the human cornea due to cataract surgery. BioMed Res Int. 2014:6280192014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Spörl E, Terai N, Haustein M, Böhm AG, Raiskup-Wolf F and Pillunat LE: Biomechanical condition of the cornea as a new indicator for pathological and structural changes. Ophthalmologe. 106:512–520. 2009.(In German). View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Wilson SE and Klyce SD: Quantitative descriptors of corneal topography. A clinical study. Arch Ophthalmol. 109:349–353. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Hager A, Loge K, Schroeder B, Füllhas MO and Wiegand W: Effect of central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis on tonometry as measured by dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Goldmann tonometry in glaucomatous eyes. J Glaucoma. 17:361–365. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Kamiya K, Shimizu K, Ohmoto F and Amano R: Time course of corneal biomechanical parameters after phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation. Cornea. 29:1256–1260. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Alió JL, Agdeppa MC, Rodríguez-Prats JL, Amparo F and Piñero DP: Factors influencing corneal biomechanical changes after microincision cataract surgery and standard coaxial phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 36:890–897. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	McMonnies CW: Assessing corneal hysteresis using the Ocular Response Analyzer. Optom Vis Sci. 89:E343–E349. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Detry-Morel M, Jamart J and Pourjavan S: Evaluation of corneal biomechanical properties with the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer. Eur J Ophthalmol. 21:138–148. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Terai N, Raiskup F, Haustein M, Pillunat LE and Spoerl E: Identification of biomechanical properties of the cornea: the ocular response analyzer. Curr Eye Res. 37:553–562. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Valbon BF, Ambrósio R Jr, Fontes BM and Alves MR: Effects of age on corneal deformation by non-contact tonometry integrated with an ultra-high-speed (UHS) Scheimpflug camera. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 76:229–232. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Valbon BF, Ambrósio R Jr, Fontes BM, Luz A, Roberts CJ and Alves MR: Ocular biomechanical metrics by CorVis ST in healthy Brazilian patients. J Refract Surg. 30:468–473. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Nemeth G, Hassan Z, Csutak A, Szalai E, Berta A and Modis L Jr: Repeatability of ocular biomechanical data measurements with a Scheimpflug-based noncontact device on normal corneas. J Refract Surg. 29:558–563. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Hamilton DR, Johnson RD, Lee N and Bourla N: Differences in the corneal biomechanical effects of surface ablation compared with laser in situ keratomileusis using a microkeratome or femtosecond laser. J Cataract Refract Surg. 34:2049–2056. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Krueger RR and Dupps WJ Jr: Biomechanical effects of femtosecond and microkeratome-based flap creation: prospective contralateral examination of two patients. J Refract Surg. 23:800–807. 2007.PubMed/NCBI
23	Gimbel HV, Iskander NG, Peters NT and Penno EA: Prevention and management of microkeratome-related laser in situ keratomileusis complications. J Refract Surg. 16 Suppl:226–229. 2000.
24	Talamo JH, Meltzer J and Gardner J: Reproducibility of flap thickness with IntraLase FS and Moria LSK-1 and M2 microkeratomes. J Refract Surg. 22:556–561. 2006.PubMed/NCBI
25	Kim JY, Kim MJ, Kim TI, Choi HJ, Pak JH and Tchah H: A femtosecond laser creates a stronger flap than a mechanical microkeratome. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 47:599–604. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Sonigo B, Iordanidou V, Chong-Sit D, Auclin F, Ancel JM, Labbé A and Baudouin C: In vivo corneal confocal microscopy comparison of intralase femtosecond laser and mechanical microkeratome for laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 47:2803–2811. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Schmack I, Dawson DG, McCarey BE, Waring GO III, Grossniklaus HE and Edelhauser HF: Cohesive tensile strength of human LASIK wounds with histologic, ultrastructural, and clinical correlations. J Refract Surg. 21:433–445. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
28	Kucumen RB, Yenerel NM, Gorgun E, Kulacoglu DN, Oncel B, Kohen MC and Alimgil ML: Corneal biomechanical properties and intraocular pressure changes after phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 34:2096–2098. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI