Biomechanically Superior Flap Creation

Maintaining the integrity of the corneal biomechanics is a critical parameter in the success of the refractive procedure—and only IntraLase^® technology delivers minimal disruption of corneal biomechanical architecture and rapid visual recovery with outstanding outcomes.

Factors Affecting Corneal Biomechanics (2) Biomechanical Advantages of IntraLase Flap Structure Separation rather than transection of stromal lamellae via photodisruption(3) Conservation of peripheral anterior fibers through accurately centered, precisely sized flaps Hinge placement is based on individual patient factors such as corneal thickness, steepness, and diameter Precisely beveled architecture that falls into the correct position and resists displacement following surgery Flap Thickness Uniformly thin, planar flaps(4) and smooth, evenly hydrated, stromal morphology Reproducible flap thicknesses with profiles that are significantly superior to those achieved by mechanical means (p<0.001)(5) Create flap thicknesses with exceptionally narrow standard deviations(5,6) Achieve flap thickness independent of corneal thickness(7) Maximized residual stromal beds with untouched anterior structure Corneal Wound Healing Rapid visual recovery Day 1: UCVA 20/16 or better in 70% of patients (n=199)(8) Month 1: Increased contrast sensitivity at all spatial frequencies vs. baseline measures (n=88)(9)

References:

1. Roberts C. Biomechanics of the cornea and wavefront guided laser refractive surgery. J Refract Surg. 2002;18:S589-S592.
2. Alió JL, Ortiz D, Piñero D. Flap biomechanics with femtosecond and mechanical microkeratomes. Data presented at: European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons; September 10-14, 2005; Lisbon, Portugal.
3. Durrie D. IntraLase vs mechanical. Presented at IntraLase Users Group Meeting. April 2005.
4. Binder PS. Flap dimensions created with the IntraLase FS laser. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30(1):26-32.
5. Kezirian GM, Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:804-811.
6. Data on file, IntraLase Corp.
7. Binder P. 1,000 consecutive IntraLase LASIK flaps. Poster presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology; October 23-26, 2004; New Orleans, La.
8. Tanzer DJ, Schallhorn S, Brown MC, et al. Comparison of femtosecond vs mechanical keratome in wavefront guided LASIK. Data presented at: American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery Symposium; April 15-20, 2005; Washington, DC.
9. Durrie D. A randomized, prospective clinical study of LASIK performed with the IntraLase FS laser vs. mechanical microkeratome. Data presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology; October 23-26, 2004; New Orleans, La.