Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Peripheral corneal relaxing incisions based on anterior keratometry from Scheimpflug tomography versus Placido topography during standard cataract surgery

  • Cataract
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

To compare the outcomes of peripheral corneal relaxing incisions (PCRIs) based on standardized nomogram using keratometry from Scheimpflug and Placido machines during standard cataract surgery and to assess the astigmatism neutralization potential of PCRIs.

Methods

In this prospective, comparative case series of eyes with keratometric astigmatism between 0.75D to 2.5D, undergoing routine cataract surgery, PCRIs were performed using standardized nomogram and keratometric data from either Scheimpflug or Placido machines. A single eye of 42 consecutive patients was recruited in each group. Data on pre- and postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected DVA (CDVA), keratometry and refraction were assessed at 10 weeks postoperatively. Refractive and keratometric J0 J45 vectors were also analyzed.

Results

Data on 41 and 39 eyes were available in each group, respectively. There was a significant reduction in keratometric astigmatism in both groups. However, between Scheimpflug and Placido groups, there was no difference in postoperative logMAR UDVA [0.15 ± 0.18 vs 0.14 ± 0.16, p = 0.82] and CDVA [0.11 ± 0.11 vs 0.09 ± 0.10, p = 0.58], postoperative spherical equivalent [–0.34D ± 0.40D vs –0.50D ± 0.43D, p = 0.11], keratometric J0 [–0.03 ± 0.39 vs 0.01 ± 0.85, p = 0.67] and J45 [–0.03 ± 0.41 vs 0.01 ± 0.86, p = 0.65] and refractive J0 [0.05 ± 0.46 vs –0.03 ± 0.92, p = 0.47)] and J45 [–0.06 ± 0.49 vs –0.03 ± 0.99, p = 0.82] vectors, reduction of keratometric astigmatism [–0.40D ± 0.55D vs –0.35D ± 1.24D, p = 0.75] and the keratometric astigmatism neutralization potential [38.56 % ± 29.71 % vs 52.66 % ± 44.06 %, p = 0.12].–

Conclusions

Although PCRIs performed using Scheimpflug or Placido keratometry reduced the keratometric astigmatism significantly during standard cataract surgery. The astigmatic neutralization potentials of PCRIs comparing these two groups were not significantly different and remain low during the early postoperative period.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kaufmann C, Peter J, Ooi K, Phipps S, Cooper P, Goggin M (2005) Limbal relaxing incisions versus on-axis incisions to reduce corneal astigmatism at the time of cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:2261–2265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Muller-Jensen K, Fischer P, Siepe U (1999) Limbal relaxing incisions to correct astigmatism in clear corneal cataract surgery. J Refract Surg 15:586–589

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Nichamin LD (2006) Astigmatism control. Ophthalmol Clin N Am 19:485–493

    Google Scholar 

  4. Talley-Rostov A (2008) Patient-centered care and refractive cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19:5–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gills JPGJ (1998) Reducing pre-existing astiigmatism. Slack, Thorofare, pp 53–66

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nanavaty MA, Favor MP, Lake DB (2013) Comparison of equivalent keratometric indices on Scheimpflug tomography with Placido-based topography system at different optical zones. Br J Ophthalmol 97:350–356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. DelRivo MVP, Galletti JD, Garibotto M, Bonthoux FF, Pförtner T, Galletti JG (2014) Agreement between Placido topography and Scheimpflug tomography for corneal astigmatism assessment. J Refract Surg 30:49–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Savini G, Barboni P, Carbonelli M, Hoffer KJ (2009) Accuracy of Scheimpflug corneal power measurements for intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1193–1197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Savini G, Barboni P, Carbonelli M, Hoffer KJ (2009) Agreement between Pentacam and videokeratography in corneal power assessment. J Refract Surg 25:534–538

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Savini G, Carbonelli M, Sbreglia A, Barboni P, Deluigi G, Hoffer KJ (2010) Comparison of anterior segment measurements by 3 Scheimpflug tomographers and 1 Placido corneal topographer. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:1679–1685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Budak K, Friedman NJ, Koch DD (1998) Limbal relaxing incisions with cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 24:503–508

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang L, Misra M, Koch DD (2003) Peripheral corneal relaxing incisions combined with cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:712–722

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pfleger T, Skorpik C, Menapace R, Scholz U, Weghaupt H, Zehetmayer M (1996) Long-term course of induced astigmatism after clear corneal incision cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 22:72–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Muller-Jensen K, Barlinn B, Zimmerman H (1996) Astigmatism reduction: no-stitch 4.0 mm versus sutured 12.0 mm clear corneal incisions. J Cataract Refract Surg 22:1108–1112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Barequet IS, Yu E, Vitale S, Cassard S, Azar DT, Stark WJ (2004) Astigmatism outcomes of horizontal temporal versus nasal clear corneal incision cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 30:418–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Budak K, Yilmaz G, Aslan BS, Duman S (2001) Limbal relaxing incisions in congenital astigmatism: 6 month follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg 27:715–719

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Qammar A, Mullaney P (2005) Paired opposite clear corneal incisions to correct preexisting astigmatism in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:1167–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bayramlar HH, Daglioglu MC, Borazan M (2003) Limbal relaxing incisions for primary mixed astigmatism and mixed astigmatism after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:723–728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Osher RH (1989) Paired transverse relaxing keratotomy: a combined technique for reducing astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 15:32–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Oshika T, Shimazaki J, Yoshitomi F et al (1998) Arcuate keratotomy to treat corneal astigmatism after cataract surgery: a prospective evaluation of predictability and effectiveness. Ophthalmology 105:2012–2016

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Carvalho MJ, Suzuki SH, Freitas LL, Branco BC, Schor P, Lima AL (2007) Limbal relaxing incisions to correct corneal astigmatism during phacoemulsification. J Refract Surg 23:499–504

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim DH, Wee WR, Lee JH, Kim MK (2010) The short term effects of a single limbal relaxing incision combined with clear corneal incision. Korean J Ophthalmol 24:78–82

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Koch DD, Ali SF, Weikert MP, Shirayama M, Jenkins R, Wang L (2012) Contribution of posterior corneal astigmatism to total corneal astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:2080–2087

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sarver EJ, Van Heugten TY, Padrick TD, Hall MT (2007) Astigmatic refraction using peaks of the interferogram Fourier transform for a Talbot Moire interferometer. J Refract Surg 23:972–977

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Packer M (2010) Effect of intraoperative aberrometry on the rate of postoperative enhancement: retrospective study. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:747–755

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sussex Eye Hospital, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK, BN2 5BF

    Mayank A. Nanavaty

  2. Corneoplastic Unit, Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead, UK, RH19 3DZ

    Marizol Dizon, Shruti Malde, Danillo Favor & Damian B. Lake

Authors
  1. Mayank A. Nanavaty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marizol Dizon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shruti Malde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Danillo Favor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Damian B. Lake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mayank A. Nanavaty.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Conflict of interests

All authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, or knowledge of the manuscript).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nanavaty, M.A., Dizon, M., Malde, S. et al. Peripheral corneal relaxing incisions based on anterior keratometry from Scheimpflug tomography versus Placido topography during standard cataract surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 254, 297–305 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3232-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3232-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation