Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Ophthalmology
Published in: BMC Ophthalmology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Visumax femtolasik versus Moria M2 microkeratome in mild to moderate myopia: efficacy, safety, predictability, aberrometric changes and flap thickness predictability

Authors: Magda A Torky, Yousif A Al Zafiri, Abeer M Khattab, Rania K Farag, Eman A Awad

Published in: BMC Ophthalmology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

This is an interventional prospective clinical study which was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety, predictability, ocular aberrations, and flap thickness predictability of Visumax femtosecond laser (FSL) compared to Moria M2 microkeratome (MK) in mild to moderate myopia.

Methods

This study included 60 eyes who were divided into two groups. Thirty eyes in group (I) in which the flap was created with Visumax FSL, while in group II (30 eyes) the Moria M2 MK was used. Keratometric, refractive, and aberrometric measurements were compared preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The intraoperative subtraction pachymetry (the SP 100 Handy pachymeter (Tomey, Nagoya, Japan) was used for preoperative pachymetry and flap thickness measurement.

Results

No significant difference was found between the two groups in regards to postoperative manifest sphere, spherical equivalent, astigmatism, safety indices nor ocular aberrations. Twenty six eyes (86.6%) in group I and 23 eyes in group II (76.6%) were within ±0.5D of the intended correction and 23 eyes (76.6%) in group I and 15 eyes in group II (50%) were within ±0.25D of the intended correction. In group I, the mean postoperative actual flap thickness was 100.12 ± 16.1 μm (81 to 122 μm), while in group II, it was 104.6 ± 20.1 μm (62 to 155 μm). The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

Both Visumax and Moria M2 MK are safe and effective in treating myopia with no statistically significant difference in induction of ocular aberrations but with potential advantage for Visumax regarding predictability. More accurate flap thickness is achieved with Visumax femtolasik.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered on 19/6/2017. Trial registration number NCT03193411, clinicalTrials.​gov.
Literature
1.
Rosa AM, Neto Murta J, Quadrado MJ, Tavares C, Lobo C, Van Velze R, Castanheira-Dinis A. FSL versus mechanical MKs for flap creation in laser in situ keratomileusis and effect of postoperative measurement interval on estimated femtosecond flap thickness. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35:833–8.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Kurtz RM, Horvath C, Liu HH, Krueger RR, Juhasz T. Lamellar refractive surgery with scanned infrastromal picosecond and FSL pulses in animal eyes. J Refract Surg. 1998;14:541–8.PubMed
3.
Du S, Lian J, Zhang L, Ye S, Dong S. Flap thickness variation with 3 types of MK heads. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011 Jan;37(1):144–8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Durrie DS, Kezirian GM. FSL versus mechanical keratome flaps in wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis; prospective contralateral eye study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:120–6.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Lim T, Yang S, Kirn MJ, Tchah H. Comparison of the IntraLase FSL and mechanical MK for laser in situ keratomileusis. Am J Ophthalmology. 2006;141:833–9.CrossRef
6.
Patel SV, Maguire LJ, McLaren JW, Hodge DO, Bourne WM. FSL versus mechanical MK for LASIK; a randomized controlled study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1482–90.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Waring GO 3rd. Standard graphs for reporting refractive surgery. J Refract Surg. 2000 Jul-Aug;16(4):459–66.PubMed
8.
Cosar CB, Gonen T, Moray M, Sener AB. Comparison of visual acuity, refractive results and complications of FSL with mechanical MK in LASIK. Int J Ophthalmol. 2013;6(3):350–5.PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Chou YS, Liang CM, Chen JT, Lu DW, Chou YC, Tai MC. Accuracy of LASIK flap thickness obtained using 2 types of Moria M2 single-use head MK measured postoperatively by optical coherence tomography. J Med Sci. 2013;33(4):191–7.
10.
Kanellopoulos AJ, Pe LH, Kleiman L. Moria M2 single use MK head in 100 consecutive LASIK procedures. J Refract Surg. 2005;21(5):476–9. Sep OctPubMed
11.
Kim JY, Kim MJ, Kim TI, Choi HJ, Pak JH, Tchah H. A FSL creates a stronger flap than a mechanical MK. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(2):599–604.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Medeiros FW, Stapleton WM, Hammel J, Krueger RR, Netto MV, Wilson SE. Wavefront analysis comparison of LASIK outcomes with the FSL and mechanical MKs. J Refract Surg. 2007;23(9):880–7.PubMed
13.
Reinstein DZ1, Carp GI, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Transitioning from mechanical microkeratome to femtosecond laser flap creation: visual outcomes of an experienced and a novice LASIK surgeon. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(10):1788–95. OctCrossRefPubMed
14.
Chen S, Feng Y, Stojanovic A, Jankov MR 2nd, Wang Q. IntraLase FSL vs mechanical MKs in LASIK for myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Refract Surg. 2012;28(1):15–24.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Kezirian GM, Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase FSL and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30(4):804–11.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Yao P, Xu Y, Zhou X. Comparison of the predictability, uniformity and stability of a laser in situ keratomileusis corneal flap created with a Visumax FSL or a Moria MK. J Int Med Res. 2011;39(3):748–58.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Huhtala A, Pietilä J, Mäkinen P, Suominen S, Seppänen M, Uusitalo H. Corneal flap thickness with the Moria M2 single-use head 90 MK. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007 Jun;85(4):401–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Blum M, Kunert K, Gille A, Sekundo W. LASIK for myopia using the Zeiss Visumax FSL and MEL 80 excimer laser. J Refract Surg. 2009 Apr;25(4):350–6.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Issa A, AL Hassany U. FSL flap parameters and visual outcomes in laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:665–74.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Montés-Micó RI, Rodríguez-Galietero A, Alió JL. FSL versus mechanical Keratome LASIK for myopia. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:62–8.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Li H, Sun T, Wang M, Zhao J. Safety and effectiveness of thin flap LASIK using a FSL and MK in the correction of high myopia in Chinese patients. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(2):99–106.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Calvo R, McLaren JW, Hodge DO, Bourne WM, Patel SV. Corneal aberrations and visual acuity after laser in situ keratomileusis: FSL versus mechanical MK. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;149(5):785–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Rosman M, Hall RC, Frazco CC. Comparison of efficacy and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis using 2 FSL platforms in contralateral eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013;39:1066–73.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zhang ZH, Jin HY, Suo Y, Patel SV, Montes-Mico R, Manche EE, Xu X. FSL versus mechanical MK laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia: Metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011 Dec;37(12):2151–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Porter J, MacRae S, Yoon G, Roberts C, Cox IG, Williams DR. Separate effects of the MK incision and laser ablation on the eye's wave aberration. Am 1 Ophthalmol. 2003;136:327–37.CrossRef
26.
Yvon C, Archer TJ, Gobbe M, Reinstein DZ. Comparison of higher-order aberration induction between manual microkeratome and femtosecond laser flap creation. Yvon C, archer TJ, Gobbe M, Reinstein DZ. J Refract Surg. 2015 Feb;31(2):130–5.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Baily C, Brosnan G, O’Keefe M. FSL compared with a mechanical Keratome for LASIK in Myopes. J Emmetropia. 2012;3:73–81.
28.
Vaddavalli PK, Yoo SH. FSL in-situ keratomileusis flap configurations. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2011 Jul;22(4):245–50.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Kim J-H, Lee D, Rhee KI. Flap thickness reproducibility in laser in situ keratomileusis with a FSL: optical coherence tomography measurement. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008;34:132–6.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Aslanides IM, Tsiklis NS, Astyrakakis NI, Pallikaris IG, Jankov MR. LASIK flap characteristics using the Moria M2 MK with the 90-microm single use head. J Refract Surg. 2007 Jan;23(1):45–9.PubMed
32.
Hyunseok A, Jin KK, Chang KK, Gyu HH. Comparison of laser-in-situ keratomileusis flaps created by 3 FSLs and a MK. J Cataract Refr Surg. 2011;37:349–57.CrossRef
33.
Reinstein DZ1, Archer TJ, Gobbe M, Johnson N. Accuracy and reproducibility of artemis central flap thickness and visual outcomes of LASIK with the Carl Zeiss Meditec VisuMax femtosecond laser and MEL 80 excimer laser platforms. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(2):107–19. FebCrossRefPubMed
34.
Ju WK, Lee JH, Chung TY, Chung ES. Reproducibility of LASIK flap thickness using the zeiss FSL measured postoperatively by optical coherence tomography. J Refract Surg. 2011 Feb;27(2):106–10.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Jacobs JM, Taravella MJ. Incidence of intraoperative flap complications in laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28:23–28.
36.
Karabela Y, Muftuoglu O, Gulkilik IG, Kocabora MS, Ozsutcu M. Intraoperative and early postoperative flap-related complications of laser in situ keratomileusis using two types of Moria MKs. Int Ophthalmol. 2014 Oct;34(5):1107–14.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Randleman JB, Lynn MJ, Banning CS, Stulting RD. Risk factors for epithelial defect formation during laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1738–43.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Moshirfar M, Gardiner JP, Schliesser JA, Espandar L, Feiz V, Mifflin MD, Chang JC. Laser in situ keratomileusis flap complications using mechanical MK versus FSL: retrospective comparison. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010;36(11):1925–33.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Mayer WJ, Grueterich M, Wolf AH, Lackerbauer CA, Eibl K, Kampik A, Kook D. Corneal cell response after flap creation using a mechanical MK or a 200 kHz FSL. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013 Jul;39(7):1088–92.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Visumax femtolasik versus Moria M2 microkeratome in mild to moderate myopia: efficacy, safety, predictability, aberrometric changes and flap thickness predictability
Authors
Magda A Torky
Yousif A Al Zafiri
Abeer M Khattab
Rania K Farag
Eman A Awad
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2415
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-017-0520-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Ophthalmology 1/2017 Go to the issue

Case report

Segmental ischaemic infarction of the iris after autologous fat injection into the lower eyelid tissue: a case report

Research article

Height, weight and body mass index of children with congenital cataracts before surgical treatment

Research article

Construction and implications of structural equation modeling network for pediatric cataract: a data mining research of rare diseases

Research article

Long term safety and tolerability of Tafluprost 0.0015% vs Timolol 0.1% preservative-free in ocular hypertensive and in primary open-angle glaucoma patients: a cross sectional study

Research article

Short-term effects of intravitreal ranibizumab therapy on diabetic macular edema

Research article

The quality of systematic reviews about interventions for refractive error can be improved: a review of systematic reviews