Direct Comparison of TG and WFO LASIK

NCT ID: NCT04919291

Last Updated: 2021-06-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

21 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-09-26

Study Completion Date

2020-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

To compare the efficacy to different profiles, direct head-to-head studies had been conducted. In one previous review study revealed that TG LASIK provided patient with better uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) than WFO LASIK and WFG LASIK. In recent previous contralateral eye studies also showed that TG LASIK induced less postoperative higher-order aberration than WFO LASIK. However, these studies included only low-to-moderate myopia patients, for patients with high myopia (spherical equivalent \> 6D), the effect of TG LASIK comparing with WFO LASIK had not been reported before.

The aim of our study is to analyze and compare the visual performance of TG LASIK and WFO LASIK in high myopia and low-to-moderate myopia patients, , particularly UCVA, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), contrast sensitivity (CS), and wavefront aberration.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ Contrast Sensitivity

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Topoguided LASIK

Topoguided ablation profile on dominant eye

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Topoguided LASIK

Intervention Type DEVICE

Topoguided ablation profile on dominant eye

Wavefront optimized LASIK

Wavefront optimized ablation profile on non-dominant eye

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Wavefront optimized LASIK

Intervention Type DEVICE

Wavefront optimized ablation profile on non-dominant eye

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Topoguided LASIK

Topoguided ablation profile on dominant eye

Intervention Type DEVICE

Wavefront optimized LASIK

Wavefront optimized ablation profile on non-dominant eye

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* age between 20 and 50 years old
* CDVA of both eyes could reach 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR)
* stable refractive errors of myopia and astigmatism

Exclusion Criteria

* cataract
* corneal opacities or irregularities
* dry eye (Schirmer's test I ≤ 5mm)
* amblyopia
* coexisting ocular pathologies
* glaucoma
* non-dilating pupil
* history of intraocular surgery, laser therapy, or retinopathy
* optic nerve or macular diseases
* estimated postoperative cornea residual stromal thickness less than 250 μm
* pregnancy or under lactation
* uncontrolled diabetic mellitus or systemic immune disease
* refusal or unable to maintain follow-up
Minimum Eligible Age

20 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

50 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Taipei Nobel Eye Clinic

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Chao-Kai Chang

Dean, Nobel Eye Institute

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Taipei Nobel Eye Clinic

Taipei, , Taiwan

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Taiwan

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Sutton G, Lawless M, Hodge C. Laser in situ keratomileusis in 2012: a review. Clin Exp Optom. 2014 Jan;97(1):18-29. doi: 10.1111/cxo.12075. Epub 2013 Jun 21.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23786377 (View on PubMed)

Moreno-Barriuso E, Lloves JM, Marcos S, Navarro R, Llorente L, Barbero S. Ocular aberrations before and after myopic corneal refractive surgery: LASIK-induced changes measured with laser ray tracing. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001 May;42(6):1396-403.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11328757 (View on PubMed)

Schallhorn SC, Farjo AA, Huang D, Boxer Wachler BS, Trattler WB, Tanzer DJ, Majmudar PA, Sugar A; American Academy of Ophthalmology. Wavefront-guided LASIK for the correction of primary myopia and astigmatism a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2008 Jul;115(7):1249-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.010.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18598819 (View on PubMed)

Stonecipher K, Parrish J, Stonecipher M. Comparing wavefront-optimized, wavefront-guided and topography-guided laser vision correction: clinical outcomes using an objective decision tree. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2018 Jul;29(4):277-285. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000495.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29787391 (View on PubMed)

Kim J, Choi SH, Lim DH, Yang CM, Yoon GJ, Chung TY. Topography-guided versus wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia: Surgical outcomes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019 Jul;45(7):959-965. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.01.031. Epub 2019 Jun 10.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31196580 (View on PubMed)

Kim J, Choi SH, Lim DH, Yoon GJ, Chung TY. Comparison of outcomes after topography-modified refraction versus wavefront-optimized versus manifest topography-guided LASIK. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020 May 14;20(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12886-020-01459-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32410588 (View on PubMed)

Ozulken K, Yuksel E, Tekin K, Kiziltoprak H, Aydogan S. Comparison of Wavefront-Optimized Ablation and Topography-Guided Contoura Ablation With LYRA Protocol in LASIK. J Refract Surg. 2019 Apr 1;35(4):222-229. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20190304-02.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30984979 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

002

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Topography-guided LASIK Surgery
NCT03292419 COMPLETED NA
Patient Reported Outcomes With WaveLight Plus LASIK
NCT07087665 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION