Loading...
2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- The Role of Corneal Biomechanics in the Assessment of Ectasia Susceptibility Before Laser Vision CorrectionPublication . Baptista, Pedro Manuel; Marta, Ana; Marques, Joao Heitor; Abreu, Ana Carolina; Monteiro, Sílvia; Menéres, Pedro; Pinto, Maria do CéuPurpose: To describe the tomographic and corneal biomechanical status of a sample of eyes excluded from LVC and to present the differences in biomechanical behavior in relation to cutoffs of clinical- and tomography-based screening methods used in clinical practice. Patients and methods: Observational cross-sectional study including 61 eyes from 32 consecutive patients who were excluded from LVC in our department. Clinical and demographic data were collected from the patients' clinical records. Tomographic data was assessed with a Scheimpflug camera (Pentacam, OCULUS®). Ablation depth (µm) and residual stromal bed (µm) were calculated by the WaveLight® EX500 laser system software (Alcon, EUA). The corneal biomechanical assessment was made through ultra-high speed Scheimpflug imaging during noncontact tonometry (Corvis ST, OCULUS®). Several ectasia risk scores were analyzed. Results: Mean age was 31.0±6 years old and mean manifest spherical equivalent was -2.01 ± 2.3D. Belin-Ambrósio deviation index was the tomographic parameter with higher proportion of eyes within the ectasia high risk interval. In the biomechanical assessment, more than 95% of eyes met the criteria for ectasia susceptibility in four of the first generation and in two of the second generation parameters. In a cutoff based comparative analysis, eyes with Kmax ≥45.5 D, eyes with VCOMA <0 and eyes with ARTmax ≤350 presented significantly softer corneal biomechanical behavior. Conclusion: The majority of eyes excluded from LVC in the present study met the criteria for ectasia susceptibility in several biomechanical parameters, validating the clinical and tomographic based screening prior to LVC in our center. Differences found in the biomechanical assessment regarding cutoffs used in clinical practice highlight its differential role in characterizing risk profile of these patients. Tomography should not be overlooked and the integration of all data, including treatment-related parameters, can be the future of risk ectasia screening prior LVC.
- Comparison of Light-Based Devices in the Treatment of Meibomian Gland DysfunctionPublication . Castro, Catarina; Marques, Joao Heitor; Marta, Ana; Baptista, Pedro Manuel; José, Diana; Sousa, Paulo; Menéres, Pedro; Barbosa, IrenePurpose: To compare different light-based devices, namely, intense pulsed light (IPL) and IPL with low-level light therapy (LLLT), in the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). Methods: This was a prospective, observational study that included patients with MGD. Group 1 included 58 eyes treated with IPL (eye-light®, Espansione Marketing S.p.A., Bologna, Italy), followed by LLLT (my-mask®, Espansione Marketing S.p.A., Bologna, Italy); Group 2 included 60 eyes treated with IPL (E>Eye®, E-Swin, Houdan, France); and Group 3 included 58 eyes treated with IPL (Thermaeye Plus®, OptiMed, Sydney, Australia). The presence of symptoms (Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI)) and ocular surface changes were evaluated at baseline, three weeks, and six months after treatment. Results: At week three, there was an improvement in the OSDI in all groups (p<0.001), without differences among them (p=0.339). The lipid layer thickness (LLT) increased in Groups 1 and 2 (p<0.001), with a similar variation (p=0.144). Patients with superior OSDI and lower LLT at baseline had the greatest improvement in the respective parameters (p<0.001). The basal tear flow increased in Group 1 (p=0.012). Corneal staining (CS) significantly decreased in Groups 2 (p<0.001) and 3 (p<0.001). At six months, compared to three weeks, there was further improvement in the OSDI (p<0.001) and the LLT (p=0.007), in Group 1, and an increase in the presence of CS in Group 3 (p=0.011). Conclusion: IPL treatment led to a sustained decrease in patients' symptoms, even after six months. Different IPL devices seem to have different beneficial effects. Adding LLLT to IPL appears to have an additional long-term beneficial effect as well as positive effects on the lacrimal gland.