It is the cache of ${baseHref}. It is a snapshot of the page. The current page could have changed in the meantime.
Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or ⌘-F (Mac) and use the find bar.

Femtosecond Laser Versus Mechanical Microkeratome in Thin-Flap Laser in Situ Keratomileusis (Lasik) for Correction of Refractive Errors an Evidence-Based Effectiveness and Cost Analysis | Mostafaie | Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences

Femtosecond Laser Versus Mechanical Microkeratome in Thin-Flap Laser in Situ Keratomileusis (Lasik) for Correction of Refractive Errors an Evidence-Based Effectiveness and Cost Analysis

Ali Mostafaie, Alireza Mahboub Ahari, Fatemeh Sadeghi Ghyassi, Sakineh Hajebrahimi, Mahmoud Yousefi

Abstract


INTRODUCTION: To compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Femtosecond laser versus mechanical Microkeratome corneal flap creation in correction of refractive errors.

METHODS: I this review, a comprehensive search of Medline, SCOPUS, Cochrane, TRIP database, supplemented by HTA and economic databases was performed. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Femtosecond laser which included mechanical Microkeratome in other arm. The quality of the retrieved studies was appraised by two independent reviewers and appropriate articles were finalized.

RESULTS: A total of 1142 articles were identified, of which, 1059 were excluded after review of the titles and abstracts and 83 articles remained. Systematic reviews and RCTs were evaluated through CASP international worksheet. Eventually, 61 titles were excluded, leaving 22 articles to be reviewed.

Safety: There was no individual evidence to cover all safety components about Femtosecond laser, but in summary, this modality seems a safe method for corneal flap creation.

Effectiveness: No statistically significant difference was shown in visual acuity and refractive errors. The important secondary end point of this review was diffuse Lamellar keratitis in 17% of the femtosecond group versus 5% in mechanical Microkeratome. Inflammation was low-grade and improved during the first 3 months of follow-up period with a low dose medication without corneal scarring. The two groups was comparable in all clinical outcomes including Unorrected Visual Acuity (UCVA), Best Special Corrected Visual Acuity (BSCVA), manifest refraction, wave front aberrometry, Schirmer test, and Tear Break up time (TBUT).

Cost Analysis: Results showed that marginal cost incurred due to Femtosecond technology adoption may vary from 27 to 117 € (resulted from sensitivity analysis). It is clear that additional cost may be a small proportion of LASIK procedure total cost.

CONCLUSION: Although Femtosecond flap creation is a modern method with a good quality of corneal flap, but, there is no high-quality evidence to show superiority of Femtosecond laser in clinical outcomes. Although the efficacy and cost of the systems is almost equal, traditional method still remains as the standard approach.

 


Keywords


Lasers; Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ; Laser Therapy; Cost Analysis;Evidence-Based Medicine

Full Text:

PDF

References


Australian Govenrment: Department of Health and Ageing. Horizon Scanning Technology Prioritising Summary: The IntraLase® Femtosecond laser. Royal Australasian: College of Surgeons; 2006.

Binder PS. One thousand consecutive IntraLase laser in situ keratomileusis flaps. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006 Jun;32(6):962-9.

Sikder S, Snyder RW. Femtosecond laser preparation of donor tissue from the endothelial side. Cornea. 2006 May;25(4):416-22.

Terry MA, Ousley PJ, Will B. A practical Femtosecond laser procedure for DLEK endothelial transplantation:cadaver eye histology and topography. Cornea. 2005May;24(4):453-9.

Buratto L, Böhm E. The use of the Femtosecond laser in pen etrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143(5):737-42.

Hashemi H, Fotouhi A, Mohammad K. The age-and gender-specific prevalences of refractive errors in Tehran:the Tehran Eye Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2004Jul;11(3):213-25.

Lim T, Yang S, Kim M, Tchah H. Comparison of the IntraLase Femtosecond laser and mechanical Microkeratome for laser in situ keratomileusis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141(5):833-9.

Kezirian GM, Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase Femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refrac Surg.2004 Apr;30(4):804-11.

Gil-Cazorla R, Teus MA, de, Benito-Llopis L, Fuentes I. Incidence of diffuse lamellar keratitis after laser in situ keratomileusis associated with the IntraLase 15kHz Femtosecond laser and Moria M2 Microkeratome.J Cataract Refrac Surg. 2008 Jan;34(1):28-31.

Tran DB, Sarayba MA, Bor Z, Garufis C, Duh YJ,Soltes CR et al. Randomized prospective clinical studycomparing induced aberrations with IntraLase and Hansatome flap creation in fellow eyes: Potential impact on wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis. JCataract Refrac Surg. 2005 Jan;31(1):97-105.

Patel SV, Maguire LJ, McLaren JW, Hodge DO,Bourne WM. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical Microkeratome for LASIK: a randomized controlled study. Ophthalmology. 2007 August;114(8):1482-90.

Montes-Mico R, Rodriguez-Galietero A, Alio JL, Cervino A. Contrast sensitivity after LASIK flap creation with a femtosecond laser and a mechanical Microkeratome.J Refract Surg. 2007;23(2):188-92.

Javaloy J, Vidal MT, Abdelrahman AM, Artola A, Alio JL. Confocal microscopy comparison of IntraLase Femtosecond laser and Moria M2 Microkeratome in LASIK. J Refract Surg. 2007;23(2):178-87.

Buzzonetti L, Petrocelli G, Valente P, Tamburrelli C,Mosca L, Laborante A and et al. Comparison of corneal aberration changes after laser in situ keratomileusis performed with mechanical Microkeratome and IntraLase Femtosecond laser: 1-year follow-up. Cornea.2008;27(2):174-9.

Li H, Sun T, Wang M, Zhao J. Safety and effectiveness of thin-flap LASIK using a Femtosecond laser and Microkeratome in the correction of high myopia in Chinese patients. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(2):99-106.

Blum M, Kunert K, Gille A, Sekundo W. LASIK for myopia using the Zeiss VisuMax Femtosecond laser and MEL 80 excimer laser. J Refract Surg. 2009;25(4):350-6.

Musch DC, Meyer RF, Sugar A, Soong HK. Corneal astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty: the role of suture technique. Ophthalmology. 1989;96(5):698-703.

Cheng YYY, Pels E, Nuijts RMMA. Femtosecond-laserassisted Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty.J Cataract Refrac Surg. 2007;33(1):152-5.

Steinert RF, Ignacio TS, Sarayba MA. “Top Hat”-shaped penetrating keratoplasty using the Femtosecond laser.Am J Ophthalmology. 2007;143(4):689-91.

Centre for Sight. IntraLase femtosecond laser track record.Last updated 2006. URL: http://www.centreforsight.com/trackrecord.php [Accessed July 2006].

Segre L, Haddrill M. Cost of LASIK and other corrective eye surgery. URL: http://www.allaboutvision.com[Accessed July 2006]




Copyright © 2012 J Lasers Med Sci "Powered by Open Journal Systems"

http://217.218.42.131/ojs/public/site/images/bouraima/80x15_80

Site Map | Privacy Statement | About JLMS | Contact | Search| Current | Archives | Open Access

ISSN: 2008-9783/E.ISSN: 2228-6721. Published quarterly by: Laser Application in Medical Sciences Research Center