You could be reading the full-text of this article now if you...

If you have access to this article through your institution,
you can view this article in

Outcomes of LASIK for Myopia With FDA-Approved Lasers

Bailey, Melissa D OD, PhD; Zadnik, Karla OD, PhD

Cornea:
doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e318033dbf0
Clinical Science
Abstract

Purpose: To report expected outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia and myopic astigmatism from existing US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.

Methods: Data from Summaries of Safety and Effectiveness for each of the 12 lasers approved by the FDA for LASIK for myopia or myopic astigmatism between 1998 and 2004 were recorded from the FDA Web site. The Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to determine whether improvements in outcomes occurred with laser technology changes.

Results: For all patients, there was a statistically significant trend toward improvement with improved laser technology in the proportion of patients with uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better, UCVA of 20/40 or better, results within ±0.50 D of intended correction, results within ±1.00 D of the intended correction, and night vision symptoms (all P < 0.0002). Because there were preoperative differences across laser types, subgroup analyses were also completed. The results for subgroup analyses (high myopia, low to moderate myopia, spherical myopia, and myopic astigmatism) for visual acuity and refractive error outcomes were similar to results for analyses for all groups combined. Conversely, there was no difference across laser types in the proportion of patients who experienced dry eye symptoms or for the proportion of patients with low to moderate myopia who experienced night vision symptoms that were worse or significantly worse than before LASIK.

Conclusions: LASIK provides excellent visual acuity and refractive error outcomes. Night vision and dryness symptoms still occur in a significant proportion of patients. Future studies should seek to determine whether additional changes in technology, patient selection criteria, or postoperative treatment could reduce or eliminate these symptoms.

Author Information

From The Ohio State University College of Optometry, Columbus, OH.

Received for publication October 25, 2005; revision received October 6, 2006; accepted October 11, 2006.

Supported by NIH/NEI Grant T32-EY013359 and American Optometric Foundation William C. Ezell Fellowships (CIBA Vision and the AAO Section on Cornea and Contact Lenses).

Presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting for the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO), April 25-29, 2004, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

The authors state that they have no proprietary interest in the products named in this article.

Reprints: Melissa D. Bailey, The Ohio State University College of Optometry, 338 West Tenth Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210 (e-mail: mbailey@optometry.osu.edu).

Copyright © 2007 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.