Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 20;13(10):3011.
doi: 10.3390/jcm13103011.

Outcomes of Corneal Compound Myopic Astigmatism with Presbyopia by Zeiss PRESBYOND® Laser Blended Vision LASIK Using Default CRS-Master® Target Refractions for Reduced Anisometropia

Julia Hernández-Lucena  1   2 , Federico Alonso-Aliste  2 , Jonatan Amián-Cordero  2 , José-María Sánchez-González  1
Affiliations

Outcomes of Corneal Compound Myopic Astigmatism with Presbyopia by Zeiss PRESBYOND® Laser Blended Vision LASIK Using Default CRS-Master® Target Refractions for Reduced Anisometropia

Julia Hernández-Lucena et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Presbyopia, a common age-related refractive error, affects over a billion people globally and significantly impacts daily life. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 288 eyes of 144 patients undergoing LBV PRESBYOND® treatment for myopic presbyopia with astigmatism, aiming to evaluate precision, efficacy, safety, and stability over six months. Results: Key findings include high efficacy, with 99% of distance-eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/25 or better, and 85% of near-eyes achieving UDVA of 20/32 or better. The results show excellent refractive outcomes, with 99% of long-sighted eyes and 97% of near-sighted eyes having a postoperative spherical equivalent within ±1.00 D. Safety was demonstrated by no loss of two or more Snellen lines after treatment, with 94% of patients maintaining corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) before and after surgery. Conclusions: Overall, LBV PRESBYOND® proved effective, safe, and well tolerated for myopic presbyopia correction, offering satisfactory visual outcomes and potential spectacle independence for various distances. This study underscores the importance of individualized treatment based on patient age, highlighting the positive impact of binocular summation on visual function. This study contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting LBV PRESBYOND® as a viable option for addressing presbyopic myopia, offering insights into its efficacy and safety profile. Further research could explore postoperative stereopsis and long-term outcomes to enhance understanding and refine treatment protocols.

Keywords: PRESBYOND® Laser Blended Vision; binocular summation; corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA); micro-anisometropia; myopic presbyopes; presbyopia treatments; uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Nine standard graphs of dominant eye for reporting refractive surgery. (A) Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA). (B) Difference between UDVA versus corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). (C) Change in Snellen Lines of CDVA. (D) Spherical equivalent refraction: attempted versus achieved. (E) Spherical equivalent refraction accuracy. (F) Spherical equivalent refraction stability. (G) Refractive astigmatism. (H) Target-induced astigmatism (TIA) versus surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) and (I) refractive astigmatism angle of error.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Nine standard graphs of non-dominant eye for reporting refractive surgery. (A) Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA). (B) Difference between UDVA versus corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). (C) Change in Snellen Lines of CDVA. (D) Spherical equivalent refraction: attempted versus achieved. (E) Spherical equivalent refraction accuracy. (F) Spherical equivalent refraction stability. (G) Refractive astigmatism. (H) Target-induced astigmatism (TIA) versus surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) and (I) refractive astigmatism angle of error.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Distribution of intended after-treatment spherical equivalent refraction (target) plotted against age.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Davidson R.S., Dhaliwal D., Hamilton D.R., Jackson M., Patterson L., Stonecipher K., Yoo S.H., Braga-Mele R., Donaldson K. Surgical Correction of Presbyopia. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2016;42:920–930. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.05.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wolffsohn J.S., Davies L.N. Presbyopia: Effectiveness of Correction Strategies. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 2019;68:124–143. doi: 10.1016/J.PRETEYERES.2018.09.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Remón L., Pérez-Merino P., MacEdo-De-Araújo R.J., Amorim-De-Sousa A.I., González-Meíjome J.M. Bifocal and Multifocal Contact Lenses for Presbyopia and Myopia Control. J. Ophthalmol. 2020:8067657. doi: 10.1155/2020/8067657. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grzybowski A., Markeviciute A., Zemaitiene R. A Review of Pharmacological Presbyopia Treatment. Asia-Pac. J. Ophthalmol. 2020;9:226–233. doi: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000297. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cho J.-Y., Won Y.K., Park J., Nam J.H., Hong J.-Y., Min S., Kim N., Chung T.-Y., Lee E.-K., Kwon S.-H., et al. Visual Outcomes and Optical Quality of Accommodative, Multifocal, Extended Depth-of-Focus, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Presbyopia-Correcting Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2022;140:1045–1053. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2022.3667. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources