Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

Majid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3Un...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moshirfar M, Shah TJ, Skanchy DF, Linn SH, Kang P, Durrie DS
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a2021-12-02T07:21:18ZComparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz1177-5483https://doaj.org/article/d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a2017-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/comparison-and-analysis-of-fda-reported-visual-outcomes-of-the-three-l-peer-reviewed-article-OPTHhttps://doaj.org/toc/1177-5483Majid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, 4McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, 5Durrie Vision, Kansas City, KS, USA Purpose: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Conclusion: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery. Keywords: wavefront-guided, topography-guided, LASIK, wavefront optimizedMoshirfar MShah TJSkanchy DFLinn SHKang PDurrie DSDove Medical PressarticleLASIKpatient reported outcomes (PROs)quality of life changesdry eyevisual symptoms after LASIKwavefront guidedtopography guidedOphthalmologyRE1-994ENClinical Ophthalmology, Vol Volume 11, Pp 135-147 (2017)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic LASIK
patient reported outcomes (PROs)
quality of life changes
dry eye
visual symptoms after LASIK
wavefront guided
topography guided
Ophthalmology
RE1-994
spellingShingle LASIK
patient reported outcomes (PROs)
quality of life changes
dry eye
visual symptoms after LASIK
wavefront guided
topography guided
Ophthalmology
RE1-994
Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
description Majid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, 4McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, 5Durrie Vision, Kansas City, KS, USA Purpose: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Conclusion: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery. Keywords: wavefront-guided, topography-guided, LASIK, wavefront optimized
format article
author Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
author_facet Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
author_sort Moshirfar M
title Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_short Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_fullStr Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_sort comparison and analysis of fda reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for lasik: wavefront guided visx idesign, topography guided wavelight allegro contoura, and topography guided nidek ec-5000 catz
publisher Dove Medical Press
publishDate 2017
url https://doaj.org/article/d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a
work_keys_str_mv AT moshirfarm comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT shahtj comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT skanchydf comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT linnsh comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT kangp comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT durrieds comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
_version_ 1718399482259832832