Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz

Majid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3Un...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Moshirfar M, Shah TJ, Skanchy DF, Linn SH, Kang P, Durrie DS
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Dove Medical Press 2017-01-01
Series:Clinical Ophthalmology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.dovepress.com/comparison-and-analysis-of-fda-reported-visual-outcomes-of-the-three-l-peer-reviewed-article-OPTH
id doaj-d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d3774428a5664d8f886d099f7eab720a2020-11-24T20:59:39ZengDove Medical PressClinical Ophthalmology1177-54832017-01-01Volume 1113514730728Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATzMoshirfar MShah TJSkanchy DFLinn SHKang PDurrie DSMajid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, 4McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, 5Durrie Vision, Kansas City, KS, USA Purpose: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Conclusion: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery. Keywords: wavefront-guided, topography-guided, LASIK, wavefront optimizedhttps://www.dovepress.com/comparison-and-analysis-of-fda-reported-visual-outcomes-of-the-three-l-peer-reviewed-article-OPTHLASIKpatient reported outcomes (PROs)quality of life changesdry eyevisual symptoms after LASIKwavefront guidedtopography guided
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
spellingShingle Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
Clinical Ophthalmology
LASIK
patient reported outcomes (PROs)
quality of life changes
dry eye
visual symptoms after LASIK
wavefront guided
topography guided
author_facet Moshirfar M
Shah TJ
Skanchy DF
Linn SH
Kang P
Durrie DS
author_sort Moshirfar M
title Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_short Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_fullStr Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and analysis of FDA reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for LASIK: wavefront guided Visx iDesign, topography guided WaveLight Allegro Contoura, and topography guided Nidek EC-5000 CATz
title_sort comparison and analysis of fda reported visual outcomes of the three latest platforms for lasik: wavefront guided visx idesign, topography guided wavelight allegro contoura, and topography guided nidek ec-5000 catz
publisher Dove Medical Press
series Clinical Ophthalmology
issn 1177-5483
publishDate 2017-01-01
description Majid Moshirfar,1,2 Tirth J Shah,3 David Franklin Skanchy,4 Steven H Linn,1 Paul Kang,3 Daniel S Durrie5 1HDR Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Salt Lake City, UT, 2Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A Moran Eye Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, 3University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, 4McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, 5Durrie Vision, Kansas City, KS, USA Purpose: To compare and analyze the differences in visual outcomes between Visx iDesign Advanced WaveScan Studio™ System, Alcon Wavelight Allegro Topolyzer and Nidek EC-5000 using Final Fit™ Custom Ablation Treatment Software from the submitted summary of safety and effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data.Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, 334 eyes from Visx iDesign, 212 eyes from Alcon Contour, and 135 eyes from Nidek CATz platforms were analyzed for primary and secondary visual outcomes. These outcomes were compared via side-by-side graphical and tabular representation of the FDA data. Statistical significance was calculated when appropriate to assess differences. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 12 months was 20/19.25±8.76, 20/16.59±5.94, and 20/19.17±4.46 for Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. In at least 90% of treated eyes at 3 months and 12 months, all three lasers showed either no change or a gain of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Mesopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 41.3%, 25.1%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Photopic contrast sensitivity at 6 months showed a clinically significant increase of 19.2%, 31.9%, and 10.6% for eyes using Visx iDesign, Alcon Contoura, and Nidek CATz, respectively. Conclusion: FDA data for the three platforms shows all three were excellent with respect to efficacy, safety, accuracy, and stability. However, there are some differences between the platforms with certain outcome measurements. Overall, patients using all three lasers showed significant improvements in primary and secondary visual outcomes after LASIK surgery. Keywords: wavefront-guided, topography-guided, LASIK, wavefront optimized
topic LASIK
patient reported outcomes (PROs)
quality of life changes
dry eye
visual symptoms after LASIK
wavefront guided
topography guided
url https://www.dovepress.com/comparison-and-analysis-of-fda-reported-visual-outcomes-of-the-three-l-peer-reviewed-article-OPTH
work_keys_str_mv AT moshirfarm comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT shahtj comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT skanchydf comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT linnsh comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT kangp comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
AT durrieds comparisonandanalysisoffdareportedvisualoutcomesofthethreelatestplatformsforlasikwavefrontguidedvisxidesigntopographyguidedwavelightallegrocontouraandtopographyguidednidekec5000catz
_version_ 1716782068547977216