Retrospective comparative study reveals image-guided cyclotorsion control achieves superior uncorrected vision in FS-LASIK eyes, indicating its effectiveness when automated tracking fails.
Purpose To compare automated cyclotorsion compensation using the WaveLight® Topolyzer™ system with manual cyclotorsion alignment guided by the Callisto image-guided system in achieving accurate astigmatic correction during femtosecond laser–assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK).Methods This retrospective, single-center study analyzed data from 159 eyes that underwent FS-LASIK with a 6-month postoperative follow-up. Group 1 (n = 113) received real-time automated cyclotorsion compensation using the WaveLight® Topolyzer™ system, whereas Group 2 (n = 46) underwent manual cyclotorsion alignment guided by the Callisto image-guided system when automated registration was not feasible. Postoperative uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, residual refractive astigmatism, and vector analysis parameters—including target-induced astigmatism (TIA), surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), correction index (CI), difference vector (DV), and index of success (IOS)—were evaluated at 1 and 6 months.Results Baseline cylindrical refractive error was comparable between the groups (p = 0.661). At 6 months, mean residual astigmatism was −0.28 ± 0.26 D in Group 1 and −0.19 ± 0.22 D in Group 2, although the between-group difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.051). Group 2 achieved significantly better UDVA at 6 months (0.01 ± 0.02 logMAR) compared with Group 1 (0.04 ± 0.07 logMAR; p = 0.019). Vector analysis demonstrated a lower difference vector and a slightly higher correction index in Group 2, indicating more precise long-term astigmatic alignment.Conclusions Both automated and image-guided cyclotorsion control strategies produced excellent visual and refractive outcomes after FS-LASIK. However, image-guided manual alignment using the Callisto system was associated with superior uncorrected visual acuity and a more favorable vector profile, supporting its use as an effective alternative when automated cyclotorsion registration is limited.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Topçu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: