Femtolaser intrastromal implantation of segments using a digital marking device in surgical treatment of keratoconus
Year: 2020, volume 16 Issue: №1 Pages: 287-293
Heading: Ophtalmology Article type: Original article
Authors: Tereshchenko A.V., Demyanchenko S.K., Vishnyakova E.N.
Organization: S. Fyodorov Eye Microsurgery Federal State Institution
Heading: Ophtalmology Article type: Original article
Authors: Tereshchenko A.V., Demyanchenko S.K., Vishnyakova E.N.
Organization: S. Fyodorov Eye Microsurgery Federal State Institution
Summary:
The purpose of the study is the clinical-functional evaluation and development of intrastromal keratoplasty using a digital marking device in patients with keratoconus. Material and Methods. 60 patients (60 eyes) diagnosed with second degree keratoconus were included in the study. The patients were from 19 to 35 years old. 30 patients (30 eyes) were included in the main group and underwent femtolaser intrastromal keratoplasty controlled by the Verion Digital Marker digital marking device (Alcon, USA). 30 patients (30 eyes) were included in the control group and underwent standard femtolaser intrastromal keratoplasty. Results. By the end of the observation period we recorded an increase in uncor-rected visual acuity from an average of 0.25 to 0.6, as well as corrected visual acuity from an average of 0.5 to 0.7 in the main group. Visual acuity was lower in control group, which was probably due to the fact that cyclotorsia was not taken into consideration during surgery. In the course of dynamic observation, we recorded a decrease in keratometry indices in the main group in the course of 3 months, next, in the following 12 months their stabilization was observed. In the course of dynamic observations in the main group, we recorded a decrease in keratometry indices in the course of 3 months, next, in the following 12 months their stabilization was observed. Conclusion. Application of Verion navigation system during intrastromal keratoplasty using a femtosecond laser with consideration of eye cyclotorsia has shown high efficiency in achieving precise positioning of the corneal segments.
Bibliography:
1. Abdulalieva Fl. The epidemiology of keratoconus in different countries. Bulletin of ophthalmology 2018; 134 (1): 104-6.
2. Bikbov MM, Surkova VK, Usubov EL, Titoyan КН. The study of hereditary forms of keratoconus. Modern technologies in ophthalmology 2018; 3: 22-4.
3. Fabrikantov OL, Manaenkova GE. Etiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, classification, treatment of keratoconus (literature review). Siberian Scientific Medical Journal 2017; 37 (4): 64-72.
4. Amsler М. Keratocone classique et keratocone fruste; arguments unitaires. Ophthalmologica 1946; 111 (2-3): 96-101.
5. Krumeich JH, Daniel J, Knulle A. Live-epikeratophakia for keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998; 24 (4): 456-63.
6. Kandayan MA, Egiazaryan AB. Incidence of keratoconus and disability due to it among teenage and draft youth of the Republic of Armenia. Bulletin of ophthalmology 2001; 3: 42-3.
7. Kopaenko Al. Current trends in the treatment of keratoconus. Tavricheskiy medico-biologicheskiy vestnik 2017; 20 (2-1): 215-26.
8. Kasparov АА, Kasparova ЕА. Principles of excimer laser and surgical treatment of keratoconus. Refractive Surgery and Ophthalmology 2002; 3: 52-62.
9. Orenburkina Ol, Usubov EL, Zajnullina NB, et al. Correction of astigmatism with toric intraocular lenses with non-progressive keratoconus. Modern technologies in ophthalmology 2017; 3: 145-7.
10. Rashidalizade ЕК. The effectiveness of implantation of an anterior chamber phakic intraocular lens in refractive disorders in patients with keratoconus. Ophthalmology 2011; 3 (7): 73-80.
H.Bikbov MM, Surkova VK, Usubov EL. 8-year corneal crosslinking results according to the standard protocol for progressive keratoconus. Modern technologies in ophthalmology 2018; 2: 55-8.
12. Bikbova РМ, Bikbov MM. Results of surgical treatment of keratoconus with end-to-end and epikeratoplasty methods. Ophthalmology 2006; 3 (3): 28-32.
13. Malyugin BE, Izmajlova SB, Ajba ЕЕ, et al. Comparative analysis of the clinical and functional results of anterior deep layer-by-layer and through keratoplasty of keratoconus. Ophthalmosurgery 2013; 4: 44-9.
14. Moroz Zl, Izmajlova SB, Kalinnikov YuYu, et al. Surgical treatment of keratoconus in the early stages of the disease using intrastromal keratoplasty with segment implantation. Ophthalmosurgery 2012; 4: 22-7.
15. Siganos D, Ferrara Р, Chatzinikolas К, et al. Ferrara intrastromal corneal rings for the correction of keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28 (11): 1947-51.
16. Colin J, Cochener B, Savary G, Malet F. Correcting keratoconus with intracorneal rings. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000; 26 (8): 1117-22.
17. Sinicyn MV, Pozdeeva NA, Pashtaev NP Comparative analysis of the clinical and functional results of femtolaser implantations of intrastromal segments and Myoring rings in patients with keratoconus. Ophthalmosurgery 2014; 3: 35-41.
18. Penkina AV, Neroev VV, Handzhyan AT, et al. Femtolaser implantation of intrastromal corneal segments in combination with corneal collagen crosslinking in the treatment of keratoconus. Practical Medicine 2012; 4-1 (59): 111-4.
19. Chernyak DA. Cyclotorsional eye motion occurring between wavefront measurement and refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30 (3): 633-8.
20. Webers V, Bauer N, Visser N, et al. Image-guided system versus manual marking for toric intraocular lens alignment in cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43 (6): 781-88. DOI: 10.1016/j. jcrs. 2017.03.041.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 2020_01-2_287-293.pdf | 1.47 MB |
Русский
English