Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ocular residual astigmatism (ORA) does not seem to correlate with baseline refractive error among refractive surgery candidates

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Ocular residual astigmatism (ORA) is defined as the difference between refractive astigmatism and anterior corneal astigmatism. A high ORA may be correlated with poorer results in patients undergoing corneal-based laser surgery. Is a high baseline refractive error related to a higher degree of ORA?

Methods

This was a retrospective analytical study including 181 right eyes of an equal number of refractive surgery candidates. Manifest subjective refraction was measured, along with a Pentacam AXL Wave corneal tomography. Via a vector analysis with this methodology, subjective cylinder was translated into the corneal plane and a vectorial subtraction was performed in order to measure ORA. Spearman’s rank order test, one-way ANOVA and Chi-square were used to determine whether different levels of baseline refractive error correlate with different levels of ORA.

Results

Mean age was 28.33 ± 4.71 years with a female preponderance (65.7%). Mean ORA was 0.74 ± 0.39 D, with 33.1% of eyes having an ORA ≥ 0.90 D. There was not a correlation between ORA and level of myopia (rho = − 0.022; p = 0.764), nor between ORA and spherical equivalent (rho = 0.009; p = 0.903). Refractive astigmatism did not demonstrate to be correlated with ORA level either (rho = 0.078; p = 0.329). One-way ANOVA tests failed to demonstrate an association between different classifications of refractive error and level of ORA.

Conclusions

In the studied population, ORA is not correlated with baseline refractive error. Every patient presenting for possible corneal-based laser refractive surgery should be evaluated for a possible high level of ORA, irrespective of their baseline ametropia level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Teus MA, Arruabarrena C, Hernandez-Verdejo JL, Canones R, Mikropoulos DG (2014) Ocular residual astigmatism’s effect on high myopic astigmatism LASIK surgery. Eye (Lond) 28(8):1014–1019

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen Z, Liu L, Pan C et al (2018) Ocular residual and corneal astigmatism in a clinical population of high school students. PLoS ONE 13(4):e0194513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Heydarian S, Sardari S, Heidari Z, Yekta AA, Ostadimoghaddam H, Khabazkhoob M (2020) Corneal and ocular residual astigmatism in school-age children. J Curr Ophthalmol 32(4):355–360

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Kugler L, Cohen I, Haddad W, Wang MX (2010) Efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis in correcting anterior and non-anterior corneal astigmatism: comparative study. J Cataract Refract Surg 36(10):1745–1752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Qian YS, Huang J, Liu R et al (2011) Influence of internal optical astigmatism on the correction of myopic astigmatism by LASIK. J Refract Surg 27(12):863–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Balparda K, Maya-Naranjo MI, Mesa-Mesa S, Herrera-Chalarca T (2022) Corneal and whole-eye higher order aberrations do not correlate with ocular residual astigmatism in prepresbyopic refractive surgery candidates. Cornea. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000003160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thibos LN, Horner D (2001) Power vector analysis of the optical outcome of refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 27(1):80–85

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Huelle JO, Katz T, Draeger J et al (2013) Accuracy of wavefront aberrometer refraction vs. manifest refraction in cataract patients: impact of age, ametropia and visual function. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 251(4):1163–1173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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(6):367–375

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Flitcroft DI, He M, Jonas JB et al (2019) IMI - defining and classifying myopia: a proposed set of standards for clinical and epidemiologic studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 60(3):M20–M30

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Althomali TA (2018) Relative proportion of different types of refractive errors in subjects seeking laser vision correction. Open Ophthalmol J 12:53–62

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Frings A, Richard G, Steinberg J et al (2015) LASIK for spherical refractive myopia: effect of topographic astigmatism (ocular residual astigmatism, ORA) on refractive outcome. PLoS ONE 10(4):e0124313

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Alpins NA (1997) New method of targeting vectors to treat astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 23(1):65–75

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lin J (2021) The contribution of ocular residual astigmatism to anterior corneal astigmatism in refractive astigmatism eyes. Sci Rep 11(1):1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Archer TJ, Reinstein DZ, Pinero DP, Gobbe M, Carp GI (2015) Comparison of the predictability of refractive cylinder correction by laser in situ keratomileusis in eyes with low or high ocular residual astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 41(7):1383–1392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pinero DP, Ruiz-Fortes P, Perez-Cambrodi RJ, Mateo V, Artola A (2014) Ocular residual astigmatism and topographic disparity vector indexes in normal healthy eyes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 37(1):49–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gab-Alla AA (2020) Contributions of anterior corneal and ocular residual astigmatism to autorefraction astigmatism in a myopic adult sample. Clin Ophthalmol 14:2125–2134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Mohammadpour M, Heidari Z, Khabazkhoob M, Amouzegar A, Hashemi H (2016) Correlation of major components of ocular astigmatism in myopic patients. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 39(1):20–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Armstrong RA (2013) Statistical guidelines for the analysis of data obtained from one or both eyes. Ophthal Physiol Opt 33(1):7–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frings A, Katz T, Steinberg J, Druchkiv V, Richard G, Linke SJ (2014) Ocular residual astigmatism: effects of demographic and ocular parameters in myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 40(2):232–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Park CY, Oh JH, Chuck RS (2013) Predicting ocular residual astigmatism using corneal and refractive parameters: a myopic eye study. Curr Eye Res 38(8):851–861

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Trinh L, Bouheraoua N, Roman S, Auclin F, Labbe A, Baudouin C (2021) Excimer laser programming of refractive astigmatism vs. anterior corneal astigmatism in the case of ocular residual astigmatism (ORA). J Fr Ophtalmol 44(2):189–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jun I, Kang DSY, Arba-Mosquera S et al (2020) Comparison of clinical outcomes between vector planning and manifest refraction planning in SMILE for myopic astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 46(8):1149–1158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Dr. Yeliana Mailyn Valencia-Gómez (Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe; Medellín, Colombia) for her kind logistic support on procuring the patients clinical records and partial filling of databases for the study.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support was received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Black Mammoth Surgical, Carrera 43 # 29 - 35, Office 712., Medellín, Colombia

    Kepa Balparda

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Universidad CES, Medellín, Colombia

    Laura Andrea Silva-Quintero

  3. School of Anaesthesiology, Universidad CES, Medellín, Colombia

    Andrea Acevedo-Urrego

  4. Department of Clinical Research, Black Mammoth Surgical, Medellín, Colombia

    Tatiana Herrera-Chalarca

Authors
  1. Kepa Balparda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Andrea Silva-Quintero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrea Acevedo-Urrego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tatiana Herrera-Chalarca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by KB, LASQ, AAU and THC. The first draft of the manuscript was written by KB, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kepa Balparda.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

This is a retrospective, chart-review study and is considered as a “no risk study” as per Colombian law. This research adhered to the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and proper ethical approval was obtained at the Ethical Committee of the Clínica de Oftalmología Sandiego.

Informed consent

No written informed consent was considered necessary as per Colombian law for retrospective studies. This article is dedicated to the memory of Don Horacio; you will not be forgotten.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Balparda, K., Silva-Quintero, L.A., Acevedo-Urrego, A. et al. Ocular residual astigmatism (ORA) does not seem to correlate with baseline refractive error among refractive surgery candidates. Int Ophthalmol 43, 4087–4096 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-023-02826-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-023-02826-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation