Original Articles

Foldable Iris-fixated Phakic Intraocular Lens vs Femtosecond Laser–assisted LASIK for Myopia Between −6.00 and −9.00 Diopters

César Albarrán-Diego, MSc; Gonzalo Muñoz, MD, PhD, FEBO; Teresa Ferrer-Blasco, PhD; Santiago García-Lázaro, PhD; Lurdes Belda-Salmerón, MSc

  • Journal of Refractive Surgery
  • June 2012 - Volume 28 · Issue 6: 380-386
  • DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20120508-01
Rights and Permissions

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To compare visual, refractive, and clinical outcomes of foldable iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) implantation versus femtosecond laser–assisted LASIK for myopia between −6.00 and −9.00 diopters (D).

METHODS:

Forty-six myopic patients were randomized to undergo bilateral Artiflex (Ophtec BV) PIOL implantation or bilateral femtosecond laser–assisted conventional LASIK with the VISX S2 (Abbott Medical Optics). Refraction, uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, corneal endothelial cell count, rate of retreatment, and complications were compared.

RESULTS:

Twelve months after surgery, no statistically significant differences were noted in spherical equivalent refraction (P=.19) or UDVA (P=.28), whereas CDVA was better in the PIOL group (P<.001). Spherical equivalent refraction was within ±0.50 D in 42 (91.3%) LASIK eyes and 41 (89.1%) PIOL eyes (P>.99). The percentage of eyes gaining lines of CDVA was significantly higher in the PIOL group (50.0% vs 8.7%; P<.001). Contrast sensitivity was better for PIOL eyes at 1.5 cycles per degree (cpd) (P=.03) and 6 cpd (P=.008). The LASIK eyes showed a mean endothelial cell count increase of 3.7%±2.8%, whereas PIOL eyes showed a mean decrease of 9.1%±2.0% (P<.001). The rate of retreatment was similar (P=.37), and no serious complications occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Artiflex PIOL provided better CDVA and contrast sensitivity at high spatial frequencies than femtosecond laser–assisted conventional LASIK, suggesting that PIOL implantation is a reasonable option for myopia between −6.00 and −9.00 D.

AUTHORS

From the Refractive Surgery Department, Clínica Oftalmológica Marqués de Sotelo, and Hospital NISA Valencia al Mar (Albarrán-Diego, Muñoz); and Optometry Research Group (GIO), University of Valencia (Albarrán-Diego, Ferrer-Blasco, Garcia-Lázaro, Belda-Salmerón), Valencia, Spain.

This research was supported in part by Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación Research Grant (#SAF2009-13342#).

The authors have no proprietary interest in the materials presented herein.

Correspondence: César Albarrán-Diego, MSc, Avda Marqués de Sotelo 5, planta 2, 46002 Valencia, Spain. E-mail: cesar.albarran@gmail.com

Received: December 11, 2011
Accepted: April 04, 2012
Posted Online: May 16, 2012

doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20120508-01

Healio is intended for health care provider use and all comments will be posted at the discretion of the editors. We reserve the right not to post any comments with unsolicited information about medical devices or other products. At no time will Healio be used for medical advice to patients.

[X]