Skip to main content

Myopia and myopic astigmatism photorefractive keratectomy: applying an advanced multiple regression-derived nomogram

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology volume 257, pages 225–232 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate a multiple regression-derived nomogram for myopia and myopic astigmatism photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

Methods

Regression modeling derived a formula for spherocylindrical correction in wavefront-optimized PRK (nomogram II). Treatment outcomes between eyes with myopia and myopic astigmatism using the manufacturer’s nomogram (nomogram I) in the years 2010–2013 were retrospectively compared with eyes treated using nomogram II in the years 2014–2015.

Results

Overall 1100 eyes (of 561 patients) were operated using nomogram I and 791 eyes (of 406 patients) using nomogram II. Nomogram II achieved correction within ± 0.5 D of the attempted in 90% (95% CI 86.8–92.3%) of eyes with a spherical equivalent (SE) < |− 6|D, compared to 84% (95% CI 81.8–86.9%) in nomogram I. Overcorrection was reached in 14% (95% CI 10.1–18.3%) of eyes with SE ≥ |-6|D in nomogram II, compared to 22.6% (95% CI 18.1–27.2%) in nomogram I. Nomogram II achieved correction within ± 0.5 D of the attempted in 88.7% (95% CI 85.7–91.6%) of patients aged 18–23 years compared to 81.2% (95% CI 77.9–84.5%) in nomogram I; however, in 77% (95% CI 69.5–84.4%) versus 87.4% (95% CI 82.7–92.0%), respectively, among patients aged ≥ 30 years. In eyes with astigmatism ≥ 2 D, a postoperative astigmatism < 0.5 D was achieved in 89.4% (95% CI 83.0–95.7%) versus 72.9% (95% CI 64.3–81.5%), and a treatment efficacy index ≥ 0.9 was achieved in 100% versus 92.6% (95% CI 87.6–97.6%) with nomogram II versus nomogram I, respectively.

Conclusion

There were several clinically significant benefits of the advanced nomogram in wavefront-optimized myopia PRK. On the other hand, there was a trend of lower accuracy in the older age group, warranting a second iteration.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Hersh PS, Brint SF, Maloney RK et al (1998) Photorefractive keratectomy versus laser in situ keratomileusis for moderate to high myopia. A randomized prospective study. Ophthalmology 105:1512–1523

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Allan BD, Hassan H, Ieong A (2015) Multiple regression analysis in nomogram development for myopic wavefront laser in situ keratomileusis: improving astigmatic outcomes. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:1009–1017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Liyanage SE, Allan BD (2012) Multiple regression analysis in myopic wavefront laser in situ keratomileusis nomogram development. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:1232–1239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mimouni M, Vainer I, Shapira Y et al (2016) Factors predicting the need for retreatment after laser refractive surgery. Cornea 35:607–612

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shapira Y, Vainer I, Mimouni M et al (2016) Effect of anisometropia on the predictability and accuracy of refractive surgery. Cornea 35:1410–1415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shapira Y, Mimouni M, Levartovsky SC et al (2015) Comparison of three epithelial removal techniques in PRK: mechanical, alcohol assisted, and transepithelial laser. J Refract Surg 31:760–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mohammadpour M, Hashemi H, Jabbarvand M, Rahmatnejad KSF (2016) Efficacy of wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy with iris registration for management of moderate to high astigmatism by advanced personalized treatment nomograme. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 11:136–140

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lapid-Gortzak R, van der Linden JW, van der Meulen IJE, Nieuwendaal CP (2008) Advanced personalized nomogram for myopic laser surgery: first 100 eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1881–1885

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Subbaram MV, MacRae SM (2007) Customized LASIK treatment for myopia based on preoperative manifest refraction and higher order aberrometry: the Rochester nomogram. J Refract Surg 23:435–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Thibos LN, Wheeler W, Horner D (1997) Power vectors: an application of Fourier analysis to the description and statistical analysis of refractive error. Optom Vis Sci 74:367–375

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Han DC, Chen J, Htoon HM et al (2012) Comparison of outcomes of conventional WaveLight((R)) Allegretto Wave((R)) and Technolas((R)) excimer lasers in myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. Clin Ophthalmol 6:1159–1168

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Caster AI, Hoff JL, Ruiz R (2004) Nomogram adjustment of laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia and myopic astigmatism with the Alcon LADARVision system. J Refract Surg 20:364–370

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ditzen K, Handzel A, Pieger S (1999) Laser in situ keratomileusis nomogram development. J Refract Surg 15:S197–S201

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mohammadpour M, Hashemi H, Jabbarvand M, Rahmatnejad KSF (2016) Efficacy of wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy with Iris registration for management of moderate to high astigmatism by advanced personalized treatment nomogram. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 11:136–140

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Subbaram MV, MacRae SM (2006) Does dilated wavefront aberration measurement provide better postoperative outcome after custom LASIK? Ophthalmology 113:1813–1817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Arnalich-Montiel F, Wilson CM, Morton SJ, Allan BD (2009) Back-calculation to model strategies for pretreatment adjustment of the ablation sphere in myopic wavefront laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1174–1180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Labiris G, Sideroudi H, Giarmoukakis A, Koukoula S, Pagonis GKV (2012) Evaluation of the difference between intended and measured ablation and its impact on refractive outcomes of the wavefront optimize profile and the S001 Wellington nomogram in myopic spherocylindrical corrections. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 40:127–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yinon Shapira and Igor Vainer contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Rambam Health Care Campus and the Technion Israel Institute of Technology, P. O. B. 9602, 31906, Haifa, Israel

    Yinon Shapira, Igor Vainer & Michael Mimouni

  2. Care-Vision Laser Centers, Tel-Aviv, Israel

    Tzahi Sela, Gur Munzer & Igor Kaiserman

  3. Department of Ophthalmology, Barzilai Medical Center, Ashkelon and the Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheba, Israel

    Igor Kaiserman

Authors
  1. Yinon Shapira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Igor Vainer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Mimouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tzahi Sela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gur Munzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Igor Kaiserman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yinon Shapira.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Barzilai Medical Center institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 40 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shapira, Y., Vainer, I., Mimouni, M. et al. Myopia and myopic astigmatism photorefractive keratectomy: applying an advanced multiple regression-derived nomogram. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 257, 225–232 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-018-4101-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-018-4101-y

Keywords

  • Nomogram
  • PRK
  • Refractive surgery
  • Regression analysis
  • Accuracy
  • Outcome