| Title |
The use of Wavelight® Contoura to create a uniform cornea: the LYRA protocol. Part 3: the results of 50 treated eyes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s133841 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manoj Motwani |
| Abstract |
To demonstrate how using the Wavelight Contoura measured astigmatism and axis eliminates corneal astigmatism and creates uniformly shaped corneas. A retrospective analysis was conducted of the first 50 eyes to have bilateral full WaveLight(®) Contoura LASIK correction of measured astigmatism and axis (vs conventional manifest refraction), using the Layer Yolked Reduction of Astigmatism Protocol in all cases. All patients had astigmatism corrected, and had at least 1 week of follow-up. Accuracy to desired refractive goal was assessed by postoperative refraction, aberration reduction via calculation of polynomials, and postoperative visions were analyzed as a secondary goal. The average difference of astigmatic power from manifest to measured was 0.5462D (with a range of 0-1.69D), and the average difference of axis was 14.94° (with a range of 0°-89°). Forty-seven of 50 eyes had a goal of plano, 3 had a monovision goal. Astigmatism was fully eliminated from all but 2 eyes, and 1 eye had regression with astigmatism. Of the eyes with plano as the goal, 80.85% were 20/15 or better, and 100% were 20/20 or better. Polynomial analysis postoperatively showed that at 6.5 mm, the average C3 was reduced by 86.5% and the average C5 by 85.14%. Using WaveLight(®) Contoura measured astigmatism and axis removes higher order aberrations and allows for the creation of a more uniform cornea with accurate removal of astigmatism, and reduction of aberration polynomials. WaveLight(®) Contoura successfully links the refractive correction layer and aberration repair layer using the Layer Yolked Reduction of Astigmatism Protocol to demonstrate how aberration removal can affect refractive correction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 22% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 11% |
| Researcher | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 67% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2017.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,780
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,286
of 325,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#29
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.