Enhancement-Optionen nach Linsen- und refraktiver Hornhautchirurgie

Zusammenfassung

Gelegentlich kommt es trotz aller Sorgfalt und präziser Operationstechnik in der Katarakt- und Refraktivchirurgie zu unbefriedigenden refraktiven und visuellen Ergebnissen. In diesen Fällen ist eine nachträgliche Korrektur erforderlich, um das beste endgültige visuelle Ergebnis zu erzielen. Dieser Beitrag zeigt die Möglichkeiten zur Behandlung residualer Refraktionsfehler nach Linsen- und refraktiver Hornhautchirurgie auf.

Abstract

Background Modern preoperative diagnostics as well as current surgical techniques allow cataract and refractive surgery to deliver precise refractive results.

Occasionally, unsatisfactory refractive and visual results occur despite all the care taken. In these cases, subsequent improvement is required to achieve the best final visual outcome. This article shows the therapeutic options for the treatment of residual refractive errors after lens and corneal refractive surgery.

Key messages The causes of postoperative refractive errors after refractive laser- or lens-based procedures are very diverse and require extensive workup of the cause as well as an individual solution to achieve the desired result. Before any further surgical intervention, specific complications of the primary procedure as well as concomitant ocular diseases must be excluded or treated. The appropriate enhancement after keratorefractive surgery depends primarily on the type of primary surgery, residual stromal thickness, possible complications from the initial surgery, and the patientʼs personal preference. For enhancements using surface treatments, such as PRK, the use of mitomycin C is recommended for prophylaxis of haze formation. After lens surgery, for low-grade postoperative refractive errors (spherical and astigmatic), keratorefractive enhancements provide the most accurate results. For higher refractive errors, lens-based procedures can be used, with add-on IOLs being safer and more precise compared with one IOL exchange. Low astigmatisms can be successfully treated with LRI or keratorefractive surgery, but higher astigmatisms should be corrected with an IOL exchange in the early postoperative period and with an add-on IOL in the later postoperative period. IOL explantations should be performed very cautiously, especially in cases of pronounced capsular fibrosis, previous posterior capsulotomy, and existing weakness of the zonular apparatus.

Kernaussagen

• Die Ursachen postoperativer Refraktionsfehler nach refraktiven Laser- oder Linsen-basierten Verfahren sind sehr vielfältig und benötigen eine umfange Aufarbeitung der Ursache sowie eine individuelle Lösung, um das gewünschte Ergebnis zu erreichen.

• Vor jedem weiteren chirurgischen Eingriff müssen spezifische Komplikationen des primären Eingriffs sowie okuläre Begleiterkrankungen ausgeschlossen bzw. behandelt werden.

• Das geeignete Enhancement nach keratorefraktivem Eingriff richtet sich vor allem nach der Art des primären Eingriffs, der residualen Stromadicke, möglicher Komplikationen durch den initialen Eingriff sowie der persönlichen Präferenz des Patienten.

• Bei Enhancements durch Oberflächenbehandlungen wie der PRK wird der Einsatz von Mitomycin C zur Prophylaxe einer Haze-Bildung empfohlen.

• Nach Linsenchirurgie liefern bei geringgradigen postoperativen Refraktionsfehlern (sphärisch und astigmatisch) keratorefraktive Enhancements die präzisesten Ergebnisse.

• Bei höheren Refraktionsfehlern können Linsen-basierte Verfahren zum Einsatz kommen, wobei Add-on-IOLs im Vergleich zu einem IOL-Austausch sicherer und präziser sind.

• Geringe Astigmatismen können mit einer LRI oder keratorefraktiven Eingriffen erfolgreich behandelt werden, höhere Astigmatismen hingegen sollten in der frühen postoperativen Phase durch einen IOL-Austausch und in der späteren postoperativen Phase durch eine Add-on-IOL behoben werden.

• IOL-Explantationen sollten insbesondere in Fällen von ausgeprägter Kapselfibrose, stattgehabter posteriorer Kapsulotomie sowie vorhandener Schwäche des Zonula-Apparates sehr zurückhaltend durchgeführt werden.

Schlüsselwörter

Enhancement - Bioptics - refraktiver residualer Fehler - refraktive Überraschung - Kataraktchirurgie

Key words

cornea-based enhancement - lens-based enhancement - refractive surprise - residual refractive error - cataract surgery

Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
22. Februar 2023

• Literatur

• 1 Moshirfar M, Jehangir N, Fenzl CR. et al. LASIK enhancement: Clinical and surgical management. J Refract Surg 2017; 33: 116-127 DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20161202-01.
• 2 Ivarsen A, Fledelius W, Hjortdal JO. Three-year changes in epithelial and stromal thickness after PRK or LASIK for high myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2009; 50: 2061-2066 DOI: 10.1167/iovs.08-2853.
• 3 Patel S, Marshall J, Fitzke 3rd FW. Refractive index of the human corneal epithelium and stroma. J Refract Surg 1995; 11: 100-105 DOI: 10.3928/1081-597X-19950301-09.
• 4 Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Vida RS. Epithelial thickness mapping for corneal refractive surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2022; 33: 258-268 DOI: 10.1097/icu.0000000000000867.
• 5 McKinney S. Before Enhancing Post-LASIK Patients. In: Review of Ophthalmology. 2020
• 6 Santhiago MR, Wilson SE, Smadja D. et al. Validation of the percent tissue altered as a risk factor for ectasia after LASIK. Ophthalmology 2019; 126: 908-909 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.01.018.
• 7 Valentina BS, Ramona B, Speranta S. et al. The influence of optical aberrations in refractive surgery. Rom J Ophthalmol 2015; 59: 217-222
• 8 Feng Y, Yu J, Wang Q. Meta-analysis of wavefront-guided vs. wavefront-optimized LASIK for myopia. Optom Vis Sci 2011; 88: 1463-1469 DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182333a50.
• 9 Alio JL, Pinero DP, Plaza Puche AB. Corneal wavefront-guided enhancement for high levels of corneal coma aberration after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008; 34: 222-231 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.09.027.
• 10 Wu L, Zhou X, Ouyang Z. et al. Topography-guided treatment of decentered laser ablation using LaserSightʼs excimer laser. Eur J Ophthalmol 2008; 18: 708-715 DOI: 10.1177/112067210801800508.
• 11 Zhou W, Reinstein DZ, Chen X. et al. Transepithelial topography-guided ablation assisted by epithelial thickness mapping for treatment of regression after myopic refractive surgery. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 525-533 DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20190730-01.
• 12 Netto MV, Mohan RR, Sinha S. et al. Stromal haze, myofibroblasts, and surface irregularity after PRK. Exp Eye Res 2006; 82: 788-797 DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2005.09.021.
• 13 Kommission Refraktive Chirurgie (KRC). Bewertung und Qualitätssicherung refraktiv-chirurgischer Eingriffe durch die DOG und den BVA – KRC-Empfehlungen; 2022. Im Internet (Stand: 10.11.2022): http://bva.dog/krc/qualit.pdf
• 14 Virasch VV, Majmudar PA, Epstein RJ. et al. Reduced application time for prophylactic mitomycin C in photorefractive keratectomy. Ophthalmology 2010; 117: 885-889 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.10.024.
• 15 Ting DSJ, Srinivasan S, Danjoux JP. Epithelial ingrowth following laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK): prevalence, risk factors, management and visual outcomes. BMJ Open Ophthalmol 2018; 3: e000133 DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2017-000133.
• 16 Bragheeth MA, Fares U, Dua HS. Re-treatment after laser in situ keratomileusis for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Br J Ophthalmol 2008; 92: 1506-1510 DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2008.143636.
• 17 Chang JSM, Liu SCT, Ma NTC. et al. Effect of time since primary laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis on flap relift success and epithelial ingrowth risk. J Cataract Refract Surg 2022; 48: 705-709 DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000817.
• 18 Lee MD, Chen LY, Tran EM. et al. A prospective comparison of wavefront-guided LASIK versus wavefront-guided PRK after previous keratorefractive surgery. Clin Ophthalmol 2020; 14: 3411-3419 DOI: 10.2147/opth.S276381.
• 19 Moshirfar M, Villarreal A, Thomson AC. et al. PRK Enhancement for residual refractive error after primary PRK: A retrospective study. Ophthalmol Ther 2021; 10: 175-185 DOI: 10.1007/s40123-021-00331-8.
• 20 Reinstein DZ, Carp GI, Archer TJ. et al. Outcomes of re-treatment by LASIK after SMILE. J Refract Surg 2018; 34: 578-588 DOI: 10.3928/1081597x-20180717-02.
• 21 Siedlecki J, Siedlecki M, Luft N. et al. Surface ablation versus CIRCLE for myopic enhancement after SMILE: A matched comparative study. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 294-300 DOI: 10.3928/1081597x-20190416-02.
• 22 Nibourg LM, Gelens E, Kuijer R. et al. Prevention of posterior capsular opacification. Exp Eye Res 2015; 136: 100-115 DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2015.03.011.
• 23 Vrijman V, van der Linden JW, Nieuwendaal CP. et al. Effect of Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy on refraction in multifocal apodized diffractive pseudophakia. J Refract Surg 2012; 28: 545-550 DOI: 10.3928/1081597x-20120723-03.
• 24 Garg P, Gupta A, Tandon N. et al. Dry eye disease after cataract surgery: study of its determinants and risk factors. Turk J Ophthalmol 2020; 50: 133-142 DOI: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2019.45538.
• 25 Kim J, Kim MK, Ha Y. et al. Improved accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation by preoperative management of dry eye disease. BMC Ophthalmol 2021; 21: 364 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-021-02129-5.
• 26 Khandelwal SS, Jun JJ, Mak S. et al. Effectiveness of multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses for cataract surgery and lens replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019; 257: 863-875 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-018-04218-6.
• 27 Agarwal S, Thornell E, Hodge C. et al. Visual outcomes and higher order aberrations following LASIK on eyes with low myopia and astigmatism. Open Ophthalmol J 2018; 12: 84-93 DOI: 10.2174/1874364101812010084.
• 28 Zeng M, Liu Y, Liu X. et al. Aberration and contrast sensitivity comparison of aspherical and monofocal and multifocal intraocular lens eyes. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2007; 35: 355-360 DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2007.01452.x.
• 29 Fernandez-Buenaga R, Alio JL, Perez Ardoy AL. et al. Resolving refractive error after cataract surgery: IOL exchange, piggyback lens, or LASIK. J Refract Surg 2013; 29: 676-683 DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20130826-01.
• 30 Sambhi RS, Sambhi GDS, Mather R. et al. Dry eye after refractive surgery: a meta-analysis. Can J Ophthalmol 2020; 55: 99-106 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2019.07.005.
• 31 Semiz F, Lokaj AS, Musa NH. et al. SMILE for the treatment of residual refractive error after cataract surgery. Ophthalmology and Therapy 2022; 11: 1539-1550 DOI: 10.1007/s40123-022-00526-7.
• 32 Seiler TG, Wegner A, Senfft T. et al. Dissatisfaction after trifocal IOL implantation and its improvement by selective wavefront-guided LASIK. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 346-352 DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20190510-02.
• 33 Lake JC, Victor G, Clare G. et al. Toric intraocular lens versus limbal relaxing incisions for corneal astigmatism after phacoemulsification. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; (12) CD012801 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012801.pub2.
• 34 Muftuoglu IK, Aydin Akova Y, Aksoy S. et al. Comparison of astigmatism correction using either peripheral corneal relaxing incisions or toric intraocular lenses. Eur J Ophthalmol 2016; 26: 236-241 DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000690.
• 35 Amigo A, Bonaque-Gonzalez S, Guerras-Valera E. Control of induced spherical aberration in moderate hyperopic LASIK by customizing corneal asphericity. J Refract Surg 2015; 31: 802-806 DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20151111-03.
• 36 Zhang L, Lin D, Wang Y. et al. Comparison of visual neuroadaptations after multifocal and monofocal intraocular lens implantation. Front Neurosci 2021; 15 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.648863.
• 37 Kermani O, Gerten G. [Explantation of multifocal intraoular lenses – frequency, causes and course]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2016; 233: 928-932 DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-104065.
• 38 El Awady HE, Ghanem AA. Secondary piggyback implantation versus IOL exchange for symptomatic pseudophakic residual ametropia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2013; 251: 1861-1866 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-013-2283-x.
• 39 Hesse RJ. Refractive changes produced by capsule contraction after piggyback acrylic intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 2229-2230 DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01278-6.
• 40 Chang DF, Masket S, Miller KM. et al. Complications of sulcus placement of single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses: recommendations for backup IOL implantation following posterior capsule rupture. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 1445-1458 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.04.027.
• 41 Baur ID, Auffarth GU, Yildirim TM. et al. Reversibility of the duet procedure: Bilateral exchange of a supplementary trifocal sulcus-fixated intraocular lens for correction of a postoperative refractive error. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2020; 20: 100957 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajoc.2020.100957.
• 42 Levinger E, Mimouni M, Finkelman Y. et al. Outcomes of refractive error correction in pseudophakic patients using a sulcus piggyback intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol 2021; 31: 422-426 DOI: 10.1177/1120672120903560.
• 43 Felipe A, Artigas JM, Diez-Ajenjo A. et al. Residual astigmatism produced by toric intraocular lens rotation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37: 1895-1901 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.04.036.
• 44 Kieval JZ, Al-Hashimi S, Davidson RS. et al. Prevention and management of refractive prediction errors following cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2020; 46: 1189-1197 DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000269.
• 45 Hengerer FH. [Current state of the “light-adjustable lens”]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2012; 229: 784-793 DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1315207.
• 46 FDA.gov.;. LAL Summary of Safety and Effectiveness. Im Internet (Stand: 10.11.2022): https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf16/P160055B.pdf
• 47 Axis Assistant entwickelt von Jose VARAS als iPhone-Anwendung, verfügbar auf:. https://apps.apple.com/app/axis-assistant/
• 48 Astigmatismfix.com von John Berdahl und David Hardtem, verfügbar auf:. https://ascrs.org/