ライフサイエンスコーパス: keratomileusis

1 t status of hyperopic laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis.

2 ma and 2.9% had prior laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis.

3 keratectomy or laser-assisted subepithelial keratomileusis.

4 hotorefractive keratectomy and laser in-situ keratomileusis.

5 rrations than wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis.

6 and reduced pain experience of laser in situ keratomileusis.

7 decreased by 90% 1 month after laser in-situ keratomileusis.

8 ions for corneal ectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis.

9 y and cellular integrity after laser in-situ keratomileusis.

10 risk factors for ectasia after laser in-situ keratomileusis.

11 ased interest in ectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis.

12 hotorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis.

13 lar pressure, poor response to laser in situ keratomileusis after incisional surgery, intracorneal ri

14 complications associated with laser in situ keratomileusis and decreasing postoperative pain and cor

15 view outlines the rationale for sub-Bowman's keratomileusis and describes the efficacy, tolerability

16 esidual refractive error after laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

17 Laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy are safe

18 Laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy have prov

19 e wound healing cascades after laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy may be si

20 tely in eyes with prior myopic laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy, with no

21 fer the combined advantages of laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy.

22 known complication after both laser in situ keratomileusis and PRK.

23 blation techniques (such as laser epithelial keratomileusis), and photorefractive keratectomy have no

24 Surface ablation and laser in situ keratomileusis are comparable in terms of safety and qua

25 ctive keratectomy and laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis are discussed.

26 active keratectomy or laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis are few and far between.

27 ctive keratectomy and laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis are now both approved for nonaviators and

28 atients who are candidates for laser in situ keratomileusis can be candidates for surface ablation, b

29 photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis can dramatically reduce postoperative ast

30 hotorefractive keratectomy and laser in situ keratomileusis can induce or exacerbate dry eye after su

31 large studies of microkeratome laser in-situ keratomileusis cases report a similar set of complicatio

32 xamination of the cornea after laser in-situ keratomileusis demonstrated that the keratocyte density

33 ients with keratoconus and postlaser in-situ keratomileusis ectasia.

34 mpared to femtosecond assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (femto-LASIK), and to photorefractive ker

35 keratocyte density within the laser in-situ keratomileusis flap and anterior residual corneal bed co

36 ng a microkeratome (similar to laser in situ keratomileusis flap), and posterior stromal tissue is ex

37 es, and evaluation of laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis flaps after cataract surgery.

38 ratomes in the construction of laser in-situ keratomileusis flaps and to see whether there is a signi

39 iority of femtosecond laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis flaps compared with microkeratome-assiste

40 l stroma and previous laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis flaps.

41 ved after femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis for myopia with consequent stabilization

42 LE versus femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.81

43 nt either femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK, n = 58) or transepithelial pho

44 ations and improved keratomes, laser in situ keratomileusis has become a realistic alternative for co

45 Laser in-situ keratomileusis has been tremendously successful in treat

46 flap LASIK, also referred to as sub-Bowman's keratomileusis, has the advantage of preserving more str

47 hotorefractive keratectomy and laser in-situ keratomileusis have been the most popular refractive sur

48 ce dry eyes that develop after laser in situ keratomileusis, improve wound healing, and reduce flap c

49 phakic intraocular lenses over laser in-situ keratomileusis in patients with moderate and high myopia

50 raft-vs-host disease (2 eyes), dry eye after keratomileusis in situ (2 eyes), and undifferentiated oc

51 the residual corneal bed after laser in-situ keratomileusis, in a noninvasive manner, highlights the

52 ment options for ectasia after laser in situ keratomileusis include intraocular pressure reduction, r

53 chniques offer advantages over laser in situ keratomileusis, including expanded potential patient pro

54 nal degeneration (n = 11), and laser in situ keratomileusis-induced ectasia (n = 12).

55 Sub-Bowman's keratomileusis is a new procedure that provides the biom

56 active keratectomy or laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis is discussed, and the potential causal as

57 that each cornea's response to laser in situ keratomileusis is unique.

58 Laser subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) is a relatively new refractive su

59 Laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) is a surgical technique that may

60 combination of LASIK, PRK, laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK), or refractive lenticule extracti

61 ve keratectomy (PRK) and laser subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK).

62 surgery in children, including laser in-situ keratomileusis, laser epithelial keratomileusis, photore

63 Wavefront-optimized laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) ablation is the most commonly per

64 prism (IOPc) before and after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (

65 Laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (

66 Laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (

67 dly combines the advantages of laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (

68 fractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) are also used to treat myopia, hy

69 ted outcome (PRO) measures for laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) are needed.

70 a microkeratome, and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) compared with unwounded controls

71 umatic dislocation of laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) corneal flaps is an uncommon post

72 erwent different algorithms of laser in situ keratomileusis (Lasik) demonstrating quantifiable differ

73 esent a case with a history of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) developing diffuse lamellar kerat

74 pairment such as post-Laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) ectasia.

75 Although laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) enjoys a high success rate, posto

76 trating keratoplasty, laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) flap or interface complications,

77 excimer laser and the laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) flap.

78 Long-term studies with laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) have continued to show good safet

79 outcome of wavefront-optimized laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with low myopia and compo

80 tome and femtosecond flaps for laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in terms of accuracy and complica

81 keratectomy (PRK) and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in the correction of hyperopic re

82 vention cause and treatment of laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) infections.

83 Wavefront-guided Laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is a widespread and effective sur

84 The corneal flap laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is among the most important deter

85 lation: patients who underwent laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy (P

86 peropic patients who underwent laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy (P

87 To evaluate laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) outcomes, subjective quality of v

88 nnaires prior to and following laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) surgery.

89 ate current trends in resident laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) training in the USA.

90 ility, and safety of hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) using a 213 nm wavelength solid-s

91 eviously treated with laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with residual error of refraction

92 Six studies used laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), 1 used photorefractive keratecto

93 higher degree of safety versus laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), it does not achieve the same vis

94 a decision on eligibility for laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK

95 ive procedures, including PRK, laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), thermal keratoplasty, and orthok

96 nic dry eye (DE) post-laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), yet its specific characteristics

97 xtraction (SMILE) and laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

98 Keratectomy (PRK) or Laser assisted in-situ Keratomileusis (LASIK).

99 MILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

100 corneal opacity after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

101 e worldwide who have undergone laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

102 hotorefractive keratectomy and laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

103 ace complications occurs after laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

104 following cataract surgery and laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

105 n of creating corneal flaps in laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

106 for starbursts after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

107 complications associated with laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

108 thirty patients that underwent laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK; n = 19) or photorefractive kerate

109 er two phakic IOLs followed by laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy (bioptics)

110 IOL implantation after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy were enrol

111 l relaxing incisions, laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis, photorefractive keratectomy and conducti

112 ser in-situ keratomileusis, laser epithelial keratomileusis, photorefractive keratectomy, and refract

113 eratoconus and progressive postlaser in-situ keratomileusis (post-LASIK) keratectasia.

114 e of corneal ectasia following laser in situ keratomileusis procedures, together with increased under

115 nd lasers for corneal flaps in laser in-situ keratomileusis seem to induce fewer signs and symptoms o

116 ve surgery procedures (such as laser in-situ keratomileusis), surface ablation techniques (such as la

117 Complications from laser in-situ keratomileusis surgery are extremely rare.

118 s to the cornea after laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis surgery make Goldmann applanation tonomet

119 The critical components in laser in-situ keratomileusis surgery remain the same, however: safety,

120 n a constant safety concern in laser in-situ keratomileusis surgery.

121 t between 3 and 6 months after laser in-situ keratomileusis, the sub-basal nerves began to recover an

122 active keratectomy or laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis) to use depends on surgeon preference and

123 Wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis (WFG-LASIK) and small incision lenticule

124 and wavefront-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (WFG-LASIK).

125 h wavefront-optimized laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (WFO-LASIK) and wavefront-guided laser-as

126 aterally treated, suitable for laser in situ keratomileusis, with monocular corrected distance visual