Intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation for ectasia after refractive surgery

5Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of intrastromal corneal ring segment (ICRS) implantation to correct ectasia in eyes with prior refractive surgery. Methods: Forty-one eyes of 25 patients (13 men, 12 women; mean age, 28.66 years) with ectasia after refractive surgery [photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK)] were included in a nonrandomized, retrospective, observational case series. Corneal tunnels were created by mechanical dissection in all eyes. Main outcome measures included uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), refraction, keratometry, and computerized analysis of corneal topography. Patients were divided into two groups by the type of refractive surgery (Group A: PRK, Group B: LASIK). Results: The mean preoperative manifest astigmatism decreased from -1.88 to -0.84 D in Group A (p=0.096) and -3.18 to -1.77 D in Group B (p=0.000). The mean keratometric astigmatism decreased from -2.58 to -1.66 D in Group A (p=0.010) and -4.80 to -2.78 D in Group B (p=0.000). The mean spherical equivalent decreased from -2.97 to -2.05 D in Group A (p=0.065) and -3.31 to -2.42 D in Group B (p=0.014). No significant between-group differences were noted on the comparison of preoperative and postoperative results. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were observed. Conclusion: ICRS implantation is a useful treatment option for ectasia following refractive surgery, and it has significantly reduced the refractive cylinder and increased best spectacle-corrected visual acuity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stival, L. R. S., Nassaralla, B. R. do A., de Figueiredo, M. N. F. C., Bicalho, F., & Nassaralla Junior, J. J. (2015). Intrastromal corneal ring segment implantation for ectasia after refractive surgery. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, 78(4), 212–215. https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.20150055

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free