Topographic Changes Induced During Flap Production by Epi-LASIK surgery
Epi-Lasik with the Epi-Head of the XP Microkeratome Pre Launch Evaluation
11
Epi-Lasik with the Epi- Epi-Lasik with the Epi- Head of the XP Head of the XP Microkeratome Microkeratome Pre Launch Evaluation Pre Launch Evaluation Bernard Mathys, MD Bernard Mathys, MD ASCRS Chicago, April 8 , 2008 ASCRS Chicago, April 8 , 2008
description
Epi-Lasik with the Epi-Head of the XP Microkeratome Pre Launch Evaluation. Bernard Mathys, MD ASCRS Chicago, April 8 , 2008. NO FINANCIAL INTEREST. Epi-Lasik. Why Epi-LSK ? Technique Material & Methods. Epithelial Healing Speed EpiLasik versus PRK. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Epi-Lasik with the Epi-Head of the XP Microkeratome Pre Launch Evaluation
Epi-Lasik with the Epi-Head of Epi-Lasik with the Epi-Head of the XP Microkeratomethe XP Microkeratome
Pre Launch EvaluationPre Launch Evaluation
Bernard Mathys, MDBernard Mathys, MD
ASCRS Chicago, April 8 , 2008ASCRS Chicago, April 8 , 2008
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
NO FINANCIAL INTERESTNO FINANCIAL INTEREST
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
Epi-Lasik Epi-Lasik Why Epi-LSK ?Why Epi-LSK ?TechniqueTechniqueMaterial & MethodsMaterial & Methods
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
Epithelial HealingEpithelial HealingSpeedSpeed
EpiLasik versus PRKEpiLasik versus PRK
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Day 1 Day 3 Day 5 Day 7
=100%
>75%
>50%
PRK
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
VA recoveryVA recoverySpeedSpeed
EpiLasik versus PRKEpiLasik versus PRK
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Day 1 Day 3 Day 7 Month 1
=20/20
>20/25
>20/40
PRK20/25
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
ResultsResults
No changes at 3M & No changes at 3M & 6M6M
No hazeNo haze
No regressionNo regression
All eyes = 20/20All eyes = 20/20
85%: 1 line more85%: 1 line more
27%: 2 lines more27%: 2 lines more
No loss of BCVANo loss of BCVA
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
3 M after Epi-Lasik3 M after Epi-Lasik
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
QuestionnaireQuestionnaire
Confort / Disconfort ?Confort / Disconfort ?
Pain ?Pain ?
Visual recovery: slow ? fast ?Visual recovery: slow ? fast ?
Fluctuations ?Fluctuations ?
Evaluation of the procedure: score ?Evaluation of the procedure: score ?
Do it again or recommend it ?Do it again or recommend it ?
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
AnswersAnswers
Very confortable: 100%Very confortable: 100%
Pain: 8%Pain: 8%
Visual recovery: faster than expected: Visual recovery: faster than expected: 88%88%
Fluctuations: 60% for the first week, then 0Fluctuations: 60% for the first week, then 0
Evaluation: 96% + 4% - (pain ?)Evaluation: 96% + 4% - (pain ?)
Do it again: 100% !Do it again: 100% !
ASCRS Chicago 2008ASCRS Chicago 2008 www.drmathys.bewww.drmathys.be
ConclusionConclusion
Safe deviceSafe device
Excellent resultsExcellent results
Excellent option when Lasik not possibleExcellent option when Lasik not possible– Less induction of HOA than LasikLess induction of HOA than Lasik– Lamellar flaps weaken the cornea, much Lamellar flaps weaken the cornea, much
more than surface ablationmore than surface ablation
Less pain & Haze than PRK/LasekLess pain & Haze than PRK/Lasek
Same instrument as LasikSame instrument as Lasik
Thank YouThank You
