Zero-Programmed-Sphere Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction: Visual, Refractive, Anterior-Keratometric, and Wavefront Outcomes in a Single-Center Series of 74 Eyes.

IF 4.2 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Ophthalmology and Therapy Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-07-07 DOI:10.1007/s40123-026-01447-5
Ivan Gabrić, Filip Grulović, Karla Bodakoš, Maja Bohač
{"title":"Zero-Programmed-Sphere Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction: Visual, Refractive, Anterior-Keratometric, and Wavefront Outcomes in a Single-Center Series of 74 Eyes.","authors":"Ivan Gabrić, Filip Grulović, Karla Bodakoš, Maja Bohač","doi":"10.1007/s40123-026-01447-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Zero-programmed-sphere keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx), also called cylinder-only KLEx, is an uncommon cylinder-dominated treatment pattern in which the planned spherical correction is 0.00 diopters (D). To our knowledge, no published outcome data characterize this pattern. To address this lack of data, we retrospectively identified all such cases from a prospectively maintained single-center refractive-surgery registry and reported visual, refractive, anterior-keratometric, and wavefront outcomes, using Alpins vector analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study is retrospective single-center, single-surgeon case series of consecutive eyes treated with the SCHWIND ATOS femtosecond laser (SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions GmbH, Kleinostheim, Germany) between August 2024 and March 2026 at a programmed sphere of 0.00 D. Cycloplegic refraction was 0.00 D sphere in all 74 eyes (cycloplegic-plano target). The data lock was 31 March 2026, and eyes treated within the 3 months preceding that date were classified as not yet eligible to be included in the study. Inter-eye dependence was assessed using generalized estimating equations (GEE), and refractive stability was studied using a linear mixed model. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was imputed as uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) when UDVA ≥ 20/20 and CDVA was missing. Complete-case sensitivity was also reported. The full-cohort ideal-outcome convention was determined using the refractive Alpins metric with a nonzero-difference-vector (DV) sensitivity subgroup; a parallel anterior-keratometric Alpins was run on the paired-keratometry subset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 74 eyes had been treated with the SCHWIND ATOS platform. At data lock, 62 were eligible for the ≥ 3-month follow-up and 37 had completed refractive examinations (analyzed primary cohort; mean age 33 years; mean programmed cylinder - 2.96 ± 1.30 D). UDVA ≥ 20/20 and ≥ 20/25 was achieved in 75.7% (Wilson 59.9-86.6%) and 91.9% of eyes, respectively; 83.8% of eyes were within ± 0.50 D of plano spherical equivalent refraction (SEQ); and 73.0% of eyes had postoperative cylinder ≤ 0.50 D. In terms of the refractive Alpins (side-by-side), the full-cohort correction index (CI) was 1.04, and mean absolute angle of error (|AoE|) was 2.9° versus 5.2° in the nonzero-DV subgroup (n = 21). In the 25-eye paired-keratometry subset, anterior-keratometric Alpins gave a CI of 1.05 and |AoE| of 13.4°, with residual anterior-keratometric DV of 1.12 ± 0.45 D versus refractive DV of 0.44 ± 0.60 D. Among the nine eyes with UDVA < 20/20, four had directly measured postoperative CDVA and five were not eligible for the imputation rule; the paired safety analysis therefore included 32 eyes (28 imputed + 4 directly measured), with complete-case (n = 4) and imputation-based indices 0.98 and 1.25, respectively. The analyzed cohort overrepresented against-the-rule (ATR) and oblique astigmatism (p = 0.002), so axis-fidelity estimates may reflect a more challenging case mix than the full treated population.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Zero-programmed-sphere KLEx produced favorable refractive outcomes in eyes reaching the ≥ 3-month endpoint. The 37/62 completion rate among eligible eyes and the imputation-based safety index limit generalizability. Wavefront changes were exploratory and generally followed the pattern expected after KLEx. The anterior-keratometric and refractive Alpins results diverged substantially, suggesting that future studies should include total corneal vector analysis and direct assessment of intraoperative rotation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19623,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"2919-2936"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13518626/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-026-01447-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Zero-programmed-sphere keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx), also called cylinder-only KLEx, is an uncommon cylinder-dominated treatment pattern in which the planned spherical correction is 0.00 diopters (D). To our knowledge, no published outcome data characterize this pattern. To address this lack of data, we retrospectively identified all such cases from a prospectively maintained single-center refractive-surgery registry and reported visual, refractive, anterior-keratometric, and wavefront outcomes, using Alpins vector analysis.

Methods: This study is retrospective single-center, single-surgeon case series of consecutive eyes treated with the SCHWIND ATOS femtosecond laser (SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions GmbH, Kleinostheim, Germany) between August 2024 and March 2026 at a programmed sphere of 0.00 D. Cycloplegic refraction was 0.00 D sphere in all 74 eyes (cycloplegic-plano target). The data lock was 31 March 2026, and eyes treated within the 3 months preceding that date were classified as not yet eligible to be included in the study. Inter-eye dependence was assessed using generalized estimating equations (GEE), and refractive stability was studied using a linear mixed model. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was imputed as uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) when UDVA ≥ 20/20 and CDVA was missing. Complete-case sensitivity was also reported. The full-cohort ideal-outcome convention was determined using the refractive Alpins metric with a nonzero-difference-vector (DV) sensitivity subgroup; a parallel anterior-keratometric Alpins was run on the paired-keratometry subset.

Results: A total of 74 eyes had been treated with the SCHWIND ATOS platform. At data lock, 62 were eligible for the ≥ 3-month follow-up and 37 had completed refractive examinations (analyzed primary cohort; mean age 33 years; mean programmed cylinder - 2.96 ± 1.30 D). UDVA ≥ 20/20 and ≥ 20/25 was achieved in 75.7% (Wilson 59.9-86.6%) and 91.9% of eyes, respectively; 83.8% of eyes were within ± 0.50 D of plano spherical equivalent refraction (SEQ); and 73.0% of eyes had postoperative cylinder ≤ 0.50 D. In terms of the refractive Alpins (side-by-side), the full-cohort correction index (CI) was 1.04, and mean absolute angle of error (|AoE|) was 2.9° versus 5.2° in the nonzero-DV subgroup (n = 21). In the 25-eye paired-keratometry subset, anterior-keratometric Alpins gave a CI of 1.05 and |AoE| of 13.4°, with residual anterior-keratometric DV of 1.12 ± 0.45 D versus refractive DV of 0.44 ± 0.60 D. Among the nine eyes with UDVA < 20/20, four had directly measured postoperative CDVA and five were not eligible for the imputation rule; the paired safety analysis therefore included 32 eyes (28 imputed + 4 directly measured), with complete-case (n = 4) and imputation-based indices 0.98 and 1.25, respectively. The analyzed cohort overrepresented against-the-rule (ATR) and oblique astigmatism (p = 0.002), so axis-fidelity estimates may reflect a more challenging case mix than the full treated population.

Conclusion: Zero-programmed-sphere KLEx produced favorable refractive outcomes in eyes reaching the ≥ 3-month endpoint. The 37/62 completion rate among eligible eyes and the imputation-based safety index limit generalizability. Wavefront changes were exploratory and generally followed the pattern expected after KLEx. The anterior-keratometric and refractive Alpins results diverged substantially, suggesting that future studies should include total corneal vector analysis and direct assessment of intraoperative rotation.

零程序球体角膜屈光透镜提取:74只眼睛单中心系列的视力、屈光、前角膜测量和波前结果。
零程序球体角膜屈光透镜提取(KLEx),也称为纯圆柱体KLEx,是一种罕见的圆柱体为主的治疗模式,其计划的球面校正为0.00屈光度(D)。据我们所知,没有发表的结果数据描述这种模式。为了解决这一缺乏数据的问题,我们回顾性地从前瞻性单中心屈光手术登记中确定了所有此类病例,并使用Alpins矢量分析报告了视力、屈光、前角膜测量和波前结果。方法:本研究是回顾性的单中心,单外科医生的病例系列,在2024年8月至2026年3月期间,使用SCHWIND ATOS飞秒激光(SCHWIND eye- technology -solutions GmbH, Kleinostheim, Germany)在0.00 D的编程球体下治疗74只眼睛(睫状体麻痹目标)。数据锁定日期为2026年3月31日,在该日期之前3个月内接受治疗的眼睛被归类为尚未符合纳入研究的条件。使用广义估计方程(GEE)评估眼间依赖性,使用线性混合模型研究屈光稳定性。当UDVA≥20/20且CDVA缺失时,将校正距离视力(Corrected distance visuacuity, CDVA)归为未校正距离视力(uncorrected distance visuacuity, UDVA)。完全大小写敏感性也有报道。全队列理想结局惯例采用折光Alpins指标和非零差分矢量(DV)敏感性亚组确定;在配对的角膜测量子集上运行平行的前位角膜测量Alpins。结果:采用SCHWIND ATOS平台治疗74只眼。在数据锁定时,62例符合随访≥3个月的条件,37例完成了屈光检查(分析主要队列,平均年龄33岁,平均程序柱面- 2.96±1.30 D)。UDVA≥20/20和≥20/25分别为75.7% (Wilson 59.9-86.6%)和91.9%;83.8%的眼睛平球等效屈光度(SEQ)在±0.50 D以内;73.0%的眼术后柱形≤0.50 d。在屈光Alpins(并排)方面,全队列校正指数(CI)为1.04,平均绝对误差角(|AoE|)为2.9°,非零dv亚组为5.2°(n = 21)。在25眼配对的角膜测量亚组中,前视角膜测量Alpins的CI为1.05,|AoE|为13.4°,剩余前视角膜测量DV为1.12±0.45 D,屈光DV为0.44±0.60 D。在9只UDVA眼中,结论:零程序球KLEx在达到≥3个月终点的眼睛中具有良好的屈光结果。符合条件的眼睛的37/62完成率和基于假设的安全指数限制了通用性。波前变化是探索性的,通常遵循KLEx后预期的模式。前位角膜测量和屈光Alpins结果差异很大,提示未来的研究应包括全角膜矢量分析和术中旋转的直接评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmology and Therapy
Ophthalmology and Therapy OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
3.00%
发文量
157
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope Ophthalmology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed (single-blind), and rapid publication journal. The scope of the journal is broad and will consider all scientifically sound research from preclinical, clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the use of ophthalmological therapies, devices, and surgical techniques. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Ophthalmology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of ophthalmic therapies. Open Access All articles published by Ophthalmology and Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Ophthalmology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5250/$6000/£4300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials, and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please follow the link for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Ophthalmology and Therapy''s content is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact christopher.vautrinot@springer.com.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书