Premium
Visual outcomes and safety of Intacs versus KeraRing intracorneal ring segment implantation in keratoconus
Author(s) -
CANADAS SUAREZ P,
HERNÁNDEZVERDEJO J,
MARINA C,
TEUSGUEZALA M
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.2272.x
Subject(s) - keratoconus , medicine , ophthalmology , astigmatism , visual acuity , group b , surgery , group a , cornea , optics , physics
Abstract Purpose To compare the safety and eficacy when two different types of intrastromal ring segments (ICRS): Intacs vs. KeraRing were used to treat keratoconus. Methods Interventional, retrospective, comparative case serie study. A total of 53 keratoconic eyes were separated in two groups matched by age and degree of keratoconus: 31 (Group A) treated with Intacs ICRS and 22 (Group B) treated with KeraRing ICRS. Main outcomes were uncorrected, best corrected visual acuity (UVA and BCVA), sphere, astigmatism, spherical equivalent (EE) and mean keratometric values (km) pre and 3 month after implantation. Safety of the procedure was also evaluated. In both groups the femtosecond laser (IntraLase Corp, Irvine CA) were used to create the tunnel. Results 3 month postop UVA were 0,26?0,2 vs 0,30?0,2 in Group A and B (p=0,6). BCVA was 0,61?0,2 and 0,67?0,2 in Group A and B (p=0,4). Postop sphere, cylinder and EE were ‐1,3?3,6D, 2,9?1,9D and ‐2,6?3,4D in Group A vs ‐1,3?1,8D, ‐3,1?2,0D and ‐2,2?2,4D in Group B respectively (p>0,05 in all comparison). Group A mean km was 43,1?12,6D vs 44,7?5.0D in Group B (p=0,6). Rate of explantation was 16,6% in Group A due to extrusion, neovascularization or non‐controled inflamation vs none in Group B. Conclusion In this serie Intacs or KeraRing implantation to correct keratoconus seems to induce the same visual outcomes. However the tolerance of keraRing was better than intacs.