Suppr超能文献

MEL 80 准分子激光角膜消融深度读数与 Artemis 三维超高频数字超声基质测量的比较。

Corneal ablation depth readout of the MEL 80 excimer laser compared to Artemis three-dimensional very high-frequency digital ultrasound stromal measurements.

机构信息

London Vision Clinic, 138 Harley Street, London, UK.

出版信息

J Refract Surg. 2010 Dec;26(12):949-59. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20100114-02. Epub 2010 Jan 15.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of the ablation depth readout for the MEL 80 excimer laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec).

METHODS

Artemis 1 very high-frequency digital ultrasound measurements were obtained before and at least 3 months after LASIK in 121 eyes (65 patients). The Artemis-measured ablation depth was calculated as the maximum difference in stromal thickness before and after treatment. Laser in situ keratomileusis was performed using the MEL 80 excimer laser and the Hansatome microkeratome (Bausch & Lomb). The Aberration Smart Ablation profile was used in 56 eyes and the Tissue Saving Ablation profile was used in 65 eyes. All ablations were centered on the corneal vertex. Comparative statistics and linear regression analysis were performed between the laser readout ablation depth and Artemis-measured ablation depth.

RESULTS

The mean maximum myopic meridian was -6.66±2.40 diopters (D) (range: -1.50 to -10.00 D) for Aberration Smart Ablation-treated eyes and -6.50±2.56 D (range: -1.34 to -11.50 D) for Tissue Saving Ablation-treated eyes. The MEL 80 readout was found to overestimate the Artemis-measured ablation depth by 20±12 μm for Aberration Smart Ablation and by 21±12 μm for Tissue Saving Ablation profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of ablation depth measurement was improved by using the Artemis stromal thickness profile measurements before and after surgery to exclude epithelial changes. The MEL 80 readout was found to overestimate the achieved ablation depth. The linear regression equations could be used by MEL 80 users to adjust the ablation depth for predicted residual stromal thickness calculations without increasing the risk of ectasia due to excessive keratectomy depth as long as a suitable flap thickness bias is included.

摘要

目的

评估 MEL 80 准分子激光(卡尔蔡司医学)的消融深度读数的准确性。

方法

在 121 只眼(65 例患者)的 LASIK 术前和至少 3 个月后,使用 Artemis 1 超高频率数字超声进行测量。Artemis 测量的消融深度被计算为治疗前后基质厚度的最大差异。使用 MEL 80 准分子激光和 Hansatome 微型角膜刀(Bausch & Lomb)进行激光原位角膜磨镶术。在 56 只眼中使用 Aberration Smart 消融模式,在 65 只眼中使用 Tissue Saving 消融模式。所有消融均以角膜顶点为中心。对激光读数消融深度和 Artemis 测量消融深度之间进行了比较统计和线性回归分析。

结果

Aberration Smart 消融治疗眼的平均最大近视子午线为-6.66±2.40 屈光度(D)(范围:-1.50 至-10.00 D),Tissue Saving 消融治疗眼为-6.50±2.56 D(范围:-1.34 至-11.50 D)。对于 Aberration Smart 消融模式,MEL 80 读数被发现高估了 Artemis 测量的消融深度 20±12 μm,对于 Tissue Saving 消融模式,高估了 21±12 μm。

结论

使用术前和术后 Artemis 基质厚度剖面测量值排除上皮变化,可提高消融深度测量的准确性。MEL 80 读数被发现高估了实际的消融深度。只要包括合适的瓣厚度偏差,MEL 80 用户可以使用线性回归方程来调整消融深度,以进行预测的残余基质厚度计算,而不会由于角膜切削深度过大而增加角膜扩张的风险。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验