Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2025

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Refractive Surgical Correction for Presbyopia and Exploring Postoperative Visual Acuity
Published on: September 20, 2024
Functional optical zone after wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis
Mariam A Elshawarby1, Ali Saad1, Thanaa Helmy1
1Ophthalmology Department, Ain Shams University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt.
Background:
Many studies have used functional optical zone (FOZ) as a measure to compare different refractive laser treatment modalities. However, to our knowledge, no study has compared wavefront- optimized (WFO) and wavefront-guided (WFG) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using FOZ. We compared the FOZ after WFO versus WFG LASIK in patients with myopia and myopic astigmatism.
Methods:
In this prospective comparative study, we included 100 myopic eyes of 50 patients with or without astigmatism. They were divided into two groups according to the platform used: WFO or WFG femtosecond LASIK. Using Holladay's equivalent keratometry reading (EKR) report of Pentacam HR, FOZ was defined as a zone centered on the pupil center with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.5 D, around the mean EKR. The differences in FOZ between the two platforms were analyzed at 3 months postoperatively. Visual acuity, refractive error, corneal asphericity (Q-value), and root mean square of higher-order aberrations (RMS for HOAs) were evaluated and compared.
Results:
The mean (SD) of patient age was 26.64 (5.67) years. The preoperative characteristics of the two groups were comparable (all P > 0.05). The intended optical zone (IOZ) was 6 mm in both groups. The mean laser ablation depth was significantly greater in the WFG group (18 µm per D) than in the WFO group (16 µm per D) (P = 0.035). At 3 months postoperatively, the mean (SD) of FOZ diameter was 4.32 (0.94) mm (71.99% [15.68%] of intended optical zone) in the WFO group and 4.16 (1.13) mm (69.33% [18.78%] of intended optical zone) in the WFG group, with no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.622). The change in corneal asphericity was greater in the WFG group than in the WFO group (P = 0.034). Postoperative mean corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, and RMS for HOAs showed no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05).
Conclusions:
We found that WFG LASIK resulted in greater ablation depth and change in corneal asphericity than WFO LASIK at 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no significant difference in FOZ diameter, refractive error, and RMS for HOAs between the two groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

