Short-term comparative outcomes of toric ICL implantation versus femtosecond LASIK for myopic astigmatism

To compare visual and refractive outcomes, predictability, safety, and efficacy of toric implantable collamer lens (TICL) implantation versus femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) in patients with moderate-to-high myopic astigmatism. Instituto de Ojos Oftalmosalud, Lima, Peru. Retrospective comparative cohort study. Consecutive eyes undergoing TICL or FS-LASIK were assessed at baseline and 3 months. Outcomes included UDVA/CDVA, spherical equivalent (SE), refractive cylinder, safety/efficacy indices, and vectorial astigmatism analysis. Double-angle plots depicted scalar magnitude/axis distributions. Non-parametric tests were used ( p < 0.05). 149 eyes (74 TICL, 75 FS-LASIK) were analyzed. Postoperative UDVA was better with FS-LASIK (0.04 ± 0.08 vs. 0.14 ± 0.16 LogMAR; p < 0.001), with no CDVA difference ( p = 0.178). FS-LASIK showed higher efficacy (1.09 ± 0.18 vs. 0.86 ± 0.23; p < 0.001) and more eyes within ± 0.50 D of emmetropia (72% vs. 53%; p < 0.001). Cylinder reduction favored FS-LASIK (–2.67 ± 0.75 vs. − 2.28 ± 1.14 D; p < 0.001). Alpins analysis: TICL—TIA 2.91 ± 1.19 D @90°, SIA 2.28 ± 1.14 D @93°, CI 0.77 ± 0.19, DV 1.72 ± 1.57 D, ME − 0.62 ± 0.56 D, AE − 2.65°±24.8°; FS-LASIK—TIA 2.86 ± 0.79 D @89°, SIA 2.67 ± 0.74 D @88°, CI 0.94 ± 0.09, DV 0.34 ± 0.49 D, ME − 0.18 ± 0.28 D, AE − 0.95°±3.83°. FS-LASIK had significantly lower DV and CI closer to 1.0 (both p < 0.001). Double-Angle plots confirmed smaller postoperative ellipses and centroid residuals with FS-LASIK (0.05 D @173°) than with TICL (0.44 D @97°). Complications were infrequent in both groups. In this selected non-randomized retrospective cohort, both TICL implantation and FS-LASIK provided effective short-term visual and refractive outcomes at 3 months. FS-LASIK showed better short-term uncorrected visual acuity, predictability, and astigmatic precision, whereas TICL remained a valuable option for eyes with higher refractive error, thin corneas, or contraindications to corneal ablation. Because treatment allocation was non-random, baseline myopia was greater in the TICL group, and follow-up was limited to 3 months, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and should not be extrapolated to long-term efficacy, safety, refractive stability, TICL rotational behavior, vault-related changes, or corneal stability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Ophthalmology
Published
2026-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-026-05094-z
Primary Topic
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Short-term comparative outcomes of toric ICL implantation versus femtosecond LASIK for myopic astigmatism

Guillermo Raúl Vera-Duarte, Maria Alejandra Henriquez, Rolando Rojas, Luis Izquierdo et al.
BMC Ophthalmology
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
article

Short-term comparative outcomes of toric ICL implantation versus femtosecond LASIK for myopic astigmatism

Guillermo Raúl Vera-Duarte, Maria Alejandra Henriquez, Rolando Rojas, Luis Izquierdo, Claudia Pomatanta, Juan Camilo
article en

Abstract

To compare visual and refractive outcomes, predictability, safety, and efficacy of toric implantable collamer lens (TICL) implantation versus femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) in patients with moderate-to-high myopic astigmatism. Instituto de Ojos Oftalmosalud, Lima, Peru. Retrospective comparative cohort study. Consecutive eyes undergoing TICL or FS-LASIK were assessed at baseline and 3 months. Outcomes included UDVA/CDVA, spherical equivalent (SE), refractive cylinder, safety/efficacy indices, and vectorial astigmatism analysis. Double-angle plots depicted scalar magnitude/axis distributions. Non-parametric tests were used ( p < 0.05). 149 eyes (74 TICL, 75 FS-LASIK) were analyzed. Postoperative UDVA was better with FS-LASIK (0.04 ± 0.08 vs. 0.14 ± 0.16 LogMAR; p < 0.001), with no CDVA difference ( p = 0.178). FS-LASIK showed higher efficacy (1.09 ± 0.18 vs. 0.86 ± 0.23; p < 0.001) and more eyes within ± 0.50 D of emmetropia (72% vs. 53%; p < 0.001). Cylinder reduction favored FS-LASIK (–2.67 ± 0.75 vs. − 2.28 ± 1.14 D; p < 0.001). Alpins analysis: TICL—TIA 2.91 ± 1.19 D @90°, SIA 2.28 ± 1.14 D @93°, CI 0.77 ± 0.19, DV 1.72 ± 1.57 D, ME − 0.62 ± 0.56 D, AE − 2.65°±24.8°; FS-LASIK—TIA 2.86 ± 0.79 D @89°, SIA 2.67 ± 0.74 D @88°, CI 0.94 ± 0.09, DV 0.34 ± 0.49 D, ME − 0.18 ± 0.28 D, AE − 0.95°±3.83°. FS-LASIK had significantly lower DV and CI closer to 1.0 (both p < 0.001). Double-Angle plots confirmed smaller postoperative ellipses and centroid residuals with FS-LASIK (0.05 D @173°) than with TICL (0.44 D @97°). Complications were infrequent in both groups. In this selected non-randomized retrospective cohort, both TICL implantation and FS-LASIK provided effective short-term visual and refractive outcomes at 3 months. FS-LASIK showed better short-term uncorrected visual acuity, predictability, and astigmatic precision, whereas TICL remained a valuable option for eyes with higher refractive error, thin corneas, or contraindications to corneal ablation. Because treatment allocation was non-random, baseline myopia was greater in the TICL group, and follow-up was limited to 3 months, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and should not be extrapolated to long-term efficacy, safety, refractive stability, TICL rotational behavior, vault-related changes, or corneal stability.

BMC Ophthalmology
National University of San Marcos (PE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon