This is the second study that involved the application of MMC in hyperopic laser correction. The first was by Garcia-Gonzalez M et al.4, who found that eyes with hyperopia treated with MMC during FemtoLASIK showed better predictability and less regression than non-MMC treated eyes after 15 months of the primary procedure. Our study agreed with these results as we noticed better predictability in group A than in group B at the 6 month and the 12 month follow-up visits, with a mean cycloplegic refraction SE of +0.5 ± 0.31 D in group A and +0.67 ± 0.39 D in group B at the 6 month follow-up visit and +0.63 ± 0.37 D in group A and +0.89 ± 0.48 D in group B at the 12 month follow-up visit.
We also found better predictability at the 12 month follow-up visit for low to moderate hyperopia correction in both study groups (86% in ‘MMC treated’ group and 72.4% in ‘non-treat’ group were within ± 0.5 D of intended correction) than for high hyperopia correction (73.5% in group A and 48.6% in group B were within ±0.5 D of the intended correction).
Jaycock et al.5 also found that after 5 years of hyperopic LASIK correction, there was more acceptable predictability for the correction of low degrees of hyperopic refractive errors (+1.00 to +3.00 D) , with 22 of 31 eyes (71.0%) within ±1.00 D of the intended correction. Predictability for higher-order corrections (+3.5 to +6.00 D) was less acceptable, with 6 of 16 eyes (37.5%) at ±1.00 D of the intended correction.
Zadok et al.6 found better predictability in correction up to +3.0 D(89% of eyes within ±1.0 D of emmetropia) with less predictability in laser correction of more than +3.0 D (52% of eyes within ±1.0 D of emmetropia).
In the current study we also found less hyperopic regression at 12 months postoperation in group A than in group B, and 11 eyes (16.2%) showed regression of +0.5 to +1.00 D at the 12 month follow-up in group A compared to 20 eyes (29.4%) in group B, while only 3 eyes (4.4%) showed regression of more than +1.00 D in group A compared to 8 eyes (11.8%) in group B.
Garcia-Gonzalez M et al.4 also observed less regression at 3 months postoperation in hyperopic eyes treated with MMC than in non MMC-treated eyes. They found that 76.3% of eyes in the MMC-treated group were within ±0.50 D compared to 55.5% in the non-MMC-treated group, and 90.5% and 82.5% were within ±1.00D in the MMC-treated and non-MMC-treated groups, respectively. The incidence of retreatments during the 15 -month follow-up was significantly lower in the MMC-treated group than in the non-MMC-treated group (6.6% versus 10.5%, respectively).
In the current study, we found no significant difference in UDVA between the groups during the 3 months postoperation; however, UDVA was higher in ‘MMC treated’ group than in ‘non-treat’ group in follow up visits at 6 months (in ‘MMC treated’ group: 0.96 ± 0.08, ‘non-treat’ group : 0.92 ± 0.09) and 12 months (‘MMC treated’group: 0.94 ± 0.09, ‘non-treat’ group : 0.89 ± 0.11).
Garcia-Gonzalez M et al.4 found a slight difference at 3 month postoperation: UDVA was 0.93 in the MMC-treated group and 0.87 in the non MMC-treated group, but no significant differences in UDVA were found at 15 months postoperation.
We agree with Garcia-Gonzalez M et al.4 that the treatment efficacy was better in the MMC-treated group at the end of the follow-up period, but we noticed better efficacy at 12 months postoperation in the correction of low to moderate hyperopia than in high hyperopia in both groups.
To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to describe the relationship between hyperopic regression and topographic corneal changes. We assessed the postoperative topographic corneal changes in all patients by studying changes in the mean corneal thickness at the 6-mm optical zone and changes in keratometry using Pentacam at 1 week and at 12 months postoperation.
In the current study we found that there was greater increase in the corneal thickness of the ablated zone (6-mm optical zone) in ‘non-treat’ group (11.4 ± 7.2 µm) than in ‘MMC treated’ group (7.2 ± 4.6 µm). The mean change in keratometry was lower in in ‘MMC treated’ group (-0.35 ± 0.3 D) than in ‘non-treat’ group (-0.56 ± 0.57 D). This explains the lower regression in in ‘MMC treated’ group patients due to fewer topographic changes in the first postoperative year.
We also found that there were fewer topographic changes in patients who had not shown regression in each study group compared to patients who had shown regression. This also explains why hyperopic regression is related to topographic corneal changes, and we believe that MMC application prevents stromal and epithelial hyperplasia associated with the regression of hyperopia.