[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Review Article
Angle Kappa and and its importance importance in refractive refractive surgery surgery Majid Moshirfar, Ryan N. Hoggan1, Valliammai Muthappan John A Moran Eye Center, Salt Lake City, 1University of Utah, School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Angle kappa is the difference between the pupillary and visual axis. This measurement is of paramount consideration considera tion in refractive surgery, surgery, as proper centration is required for optimal results. Angle kappa may contribute to MFIOL decentration and its resultant photic phenomena. Adjusting placement of MFIOLs for angle kappa is not supported by the literature but is likely to help reduce glare and haloes. Centering LASIK in angle kappa patients over the corneal light reflex is safe, efficacious, and recommended. Centering in-between the corneal reflex and the entrance pupil is
also safe and efficacious. The literature regarding PRK in patients with an angle kappa is sparse but centering on the corneal reflex is assumed to be similar to centering LASIK on the corneal reflex. Thus, centration of MFIOLs, LASIK, and PRK should be focused on the corneal reflex for patients with a large angle kappa. More research is needed to guide surgeons’ approach to angle kappa. Keywords: Angle Kappa, Visual Axis, Pupillary Axis, LASIK, PRK, Multi focal Intra ocular lenses.
Introduction With recent advancements in the precision of refractive surgery angle kappa stands as an important consideration in improving visual outcomes. Angle kappa is defined as the angle between the visual axis (line connecting the fixation fix ation point with the fovea) and the pupillary axis (line that perpendicularly passes through the entrance pupil and the center of curvature of the cornea).[1] It can be identified clinically by the nasal displacement of the corneal light reflex from the pupil center, [2] and it represents a misalignment of light passing through the refractive surface of the cornea and the bundle of light formed by the pupil. Figure 1 depicts a coronal view of angle kappa as well as the surgeon’s view when seen through the microscope. A large angle kappa is clinically significant as it may lead to alignment errors during photo ablation in laser refractive surgery, surgery,[3] as well lens decentration in intraocular refractive surgery. The Access this article online Quick Response Code: Website: www.ojoonline.org
DOI: 10.4103/0974-620X.122268
b
a
c
Figure 1: (a) 1: (a) Depicting angle , geometric center of the cornea (GCC), entrance pupil center (EPC), and coaxially sighted corneal light reflex (CSCLR) as identified by Pande and Hillman,[4] (b) Surgeon’s view of a large angle kappa, (c) Surgeon’s view of a normal but small positive angle kappa. (•) = EPC (+) = CSCLR
decentration of ablation zones can lead to under correction[4] and irregular astigmatism.[3] Decentration of intraocular lenses may cause photic phenomenon[5] and decreased lens effectiveness.[6] This issue is most important in hyperopic patients, who tend to have larger angle kappa values.[3,7] A Pubmed literature review was conducted for several terms related to angle kappa and refractive surgery. surgery. Relevant manuscripts were
Copyright: 2013 Moshirfar M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Correspondence: Dr. Majid Moshirfar, John A. Moran Eye Center, 65 N Mario Capecchi, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. E-mail:
[email protected] [email protected]
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
151
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery compiled into this review to summarize the current literature on the role of angle kappa in refractive surgery, specifically as it relates to PRK, LASIK, and placement of multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs).
cause photic phenomenon [5] and is one of the main indications for MFIOL exchange.[12] A large angle kappa could contribute to functional decentration if the MFIOL is centered on one axis, (pupillary or visual axis) and is not aligned with the other.
Materials and Methods
In 2011 Prakash et al reported that larger preoperative angle kappa values in MFIOL placement were correlated with patient complaints of glare ( R 2= 0.26, P= 0.033). They also reported that perceived severity of haloes were correlated to angle kappa and
A thorough PubMed search was conducted using various combinations of the following terms: Angle Kappa, LASIK, PRK,
2
Intraocular lenses, Capsulorrhexis, Centration, Refractive Surgery, Surgery, Cataract Surgery, Surgery, Pupillary Axis, Axi s, Visual Axis, Axi s, Coaxial Axis, Axi s, Pupil Tracking, and Hyperopia. The search was limited to articles of the following types: Reviews, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trial, practice guidelines, meta-analysis, journal article, guideline, clinical trial, and case reports. The initial literature review resulted in 66 articles. From the initial inquiry articles were chosen based on their relevance to Angle kappa, MFIOLs, LASIK, PRK and Hyperopia. In total 40 articles were selected, reviewed for relevant content, and compiled into i nto this review.
Angle kappa in the general population As the fovea lies slightly temporal to the point at which the pupillary axis intersects with the posterior pole of the globe, the normal angle kappa is slightly positive. [3] The high prevalence of small positive angle kappa values in the non-hyperopic population was reported in 2005 by Srivannaboon and Chotikavanich. In 408/420 (97%) eyes undergoing refractive surgery for correction of myopia, a positive angle kappa of 0.5 mm or less was observed.[8] Several studies have been conducted to determine the population’s mean value of a positive angle kappa. The results of these studies are summarized in Table 1. Based on current literature the mean value of angle kappa in a normal population of emmetropes lies between 2.78 ± 0.12° in right eyes and 3.32 ± 0.13° in left eyes when measured by the Syntophore corneal topography system (Clement Clarke International Ltd, London, UK).[3,9] The value lies between 5.55 ± 0.13° and 5.62 ± 0.10° in right and left eyes respectively when measured by the Orbscan II corneal topographer (Bausch and Lomb, USA).[3] The range may slightly differ (4.97 ± 1.24°) if measured with the Orbscan IIz (Bausch and Lomb, USA).[10]
postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA) ( R = 0.26, P = 0.029 ).[5] While positive angle kappa may play a role in contributing to glare and haloes, dissatisfaction with MFIOLs is truly multifactorial. Blurry vision of various etiologies,[13] other forms of photic phenomenon,[14] and unsatisfactory postoperative distance UCVA[5] are more common patient complaints after receiving MFIOLs. A large angle kappa may contribute to functional decentration of MFIOLs, but the effect of this decentration is not clear. In 2010, Rosales et al used simulated aberration models generated from the anatomical, Purkinje, and Sheimpflug data of 21 eyes to show that the tilt and decentration of IOLs have only a minor effect on higher order aberrations.[15] However, it has been reported that decentration of MFIOLs greater than 0.7 mm substantially impairs distance visual vi sual acuity. acuity. [6] If the lens is significantly decentered because of failure to accommodate for angle kappa, then central light rays may miss the central optical zone and pass through one of the multifocal rings, leading to glare. In 2012, Berdahl suggested that MFIOLs are unacceptable for use if the angle kappa is greater than half of the diameter of the central optical zone for the respective lens. For the ReSTOR lens (Alcon TX, USA) this would be an angle kappa greater than 0.4mm and for the Tecnis lens (Abbott Illinois, USA) this would be a value greater than 0.5 mm. [16] One proposed method for compensating for large angle kappa in MFIOLs is to purposely decenter the lens toward the visual axis.
Angle kappa and multifocal intra ocular lenses
Due to contraction of the capsule, memory of the haptics, and IOL rotation, it is uncertain if the lens would stay in the decentered position.[5] Gluing a single haptic of the IOL to align its position with the visual axis has also been suggested.[5] Solomon and Donnefield have reported performing post-operative pupilloplasty with argon laser to center the pupil, and move the pupillary axis closer to the visual axis in MFIOL cases with a large angle kappa.[17] Melki and Harissi-Dagher described a method for centering the capsulorrhexis on the coaxially sighted intraocular lens reflex instead of the corneal reflex as a way to accommodate for angle kappa.[18] These methods may be effective but have not been validated in large studies. More research is needed to determine their clinical relevance.
Multi-focal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) are designed with concentric apodization to provide functional vision at distance as well as near. With this design distance and intermediate visual acuity are adversely affected if the lens is decentered.[6] The etiology of this is not fully understood. Decentration can also
Based on the current literature, a large angle kappa may contribute to decentration of MFIOLs potentially resulting in glare and decreased visual acuity. However, the clinical significance of lens decentration as a direct result of angle kappa is not fully
The significance of eye dominance as well as the machine used to measure angle kappa is not fully understood however, these are two variables that should likely be considered when contemplating issues related to angle kappa. Additionally gender does not appear to be correlated with angle kappa. [1] While angle kappa tends to decrease with age,[1] the change in direction or magnitude is not significant.[11]
152
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology Ophthalmology,, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journ
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery
Table 1: Summary of studies reporting normative angle kappa values Author
Type of study
# of eyes/ patients studied
Method of measurement
Angle kappa values
Significant findings
Basmak et al . (2007)[9]
Prospective group comparison
108 strabismic subjects and 102 healthy controls
Synoptophore Topographer (Clement Clarke, London, UK)
Esotropic group: OD 2.35° ±0.41° OS 2.55° ±0.42° Exotropic group: OD 3.83° ±0.36° OS 4.38° ±0.28°
Basmak et al .
Prospective
150 men and
Synoptophore
Synoptophore
Exotropes have significantly higher values of angle kappa than esoptropes or controls. Angle kappa tends to be larger in left eye than in right eye. Positive correlation between
group comparison
150 women
Topographer Orbscan II (Bausch and Lomb, USA)
angle kappa and positive refractive errors. Orbscan II values are an average of 1.55 mm larger than Synoptophore values
Hashemi et al . (2010)[1]
Cross sectional survey
800 eyes from 442 participants
Orbscan Topographer (Bausch and Lomb, USA)
Zarei-Ghanavati
Prospective
96 eyes from
Orbscan II
Myopic Group: OD 1.74° ±0.13° OS 1.91° ±0.14 Hyperopic group: OD 3.44° ±0.14° OS 3.84° ±0.17° Orbscan II Mypoic Group: OD 4.51° ±0.11° OS 4.73° ±0.1 ±0.11° 1° Hyperopic Group: OD 5.65° ±0.10° OS 5.73° ±0.1 ±0.10° 0° Myopic Group: 5.13° ±1.50° Emmertropic Group: 5.72° ±1.10° Hyperopic Group: 5.52° ±1.19° Mild Hyperopic Group: 5.53° ±1.24° Moderate Hyperopic Group: 5.45° ±1.26° Severe Hyperopic Group: 5.59° ±2.61° Preoperative mean angle kappa values:
et al . (2013)[10]
controlled study
48 myopic patients
z (Bausch and Lomb, USA)
4.97° ±1.24° Postoperative mean angle kappa values: 4.99° ±1.10°
in angle kappa before and after PRK
(2007)
[3]
understood. There is no evidence to show that altering centration of MFIOLs is detrimental or dangerous for the patient. Thus we recommend centering these lenses on the corneal reflex in eyes with angle kappa values greater than the normative values discussed earlier as per eye and per topography topo graphy system used.
Angle kappa in laser guided refractive surgery: the debate over where to center ablation profiles
Angle kappa is larger in hyperopes than myopes. Angle kappa slightly decreases with age but is not correlated to gender
There is no significant change
to the center of the pupil as it changed with differing light conditions.[23] The results of this study are summarized in Table 2. 4. Between the pupillary and visual axis: In 2009 Kermani et al centered on a distance halfway between the center of the pupil (line of sight) and the corneal light reflex (visual axis) in patients with a large angle kappa.[24]
There are four main methods for centration of laser refractive surgery that have been suggested in the literature:
These four methods of centration have not simultaneously been compared in head to head trials. The following will discuss what
1. Center of the pupil: In 1987, [19] Uozato and Guyton suggested using the center of the pupil as it has been shown that photoreceptors actively orient themselves toward the pupillary center.[20] Mandell seconded this suggestions with the rationale that the pupil defines the bundle of light that passes through the eye and forms the retinal image.[21] 2. Coaxially Sighted Corneal Light Reflex: In 1993, Pande and Hillman concluded that the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex (CSCLR) should be used for centration as it was the closest measurable point to the visual axis. [4] Additionally, they noted that the center of the pupil changes position with changes in the size of the pupil, [22] and thus should not be used for centration.[4] 3. Corneal Vertex Normal: In 2006, De Ortueta et al centered ablation zones on the corneal vertex normal, [23] which is the point of maximum elevation in corneal topography. [2] This was combined with videokeratoscopy/pupil tracking which allowed the ablation zone to shift a fixed amount in relation
has been accomplished in the literature specifically as it relates centering in patients with a large angle kappa.
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
Angle kappa and hyperopic laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) Several studies are found in the literature that demonstrate the benefits of moving centration for hyperopic LASIK to the CSCLR to adjust for a large angle kappa. This review focused on hyperopic LASIK as hyperopes are more likely to have a large angle kappa. These studies are summarized in Table 2. Nepomuceno et al was the first to validate this method in 2004 with patients who underwent hyperopic LASIK correction using the LADARVision 4000 excimer laser (Alcon, TX, USA). They reported an increased safety profile which they attributed to this centration technique because the same surgeon did not have equivalently good results when using other centration sites. The authors stressed the importance of centering over the CSCLR for 153
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery
Table 2: Summary of articles relating angle kappa to LASIK Author
Study type
Centration point used
# of eyes/ patients studied
Results
Significant findings
Boxer Walchler et al . (2003)[29]
Case report
Entrance pupil in the right eye; CSCLR in the left eye
2 eyes with positive angle kappa
UDVA 20/80 in the right eye, 20/20 in the left eye. BSCVA 20/30 in the right eye, 20/16 in the left eye. BSCCS of 60% in the right eye,
Single example of superiority of centering on the CSCLR compared with the entrance pupil in an angle kappa patient
Nepomuceno et al . (2004)[25]
Retrospective chart review
CSCLR
61 eyes of 48 hyperopic patients
Chan and Boxer Wachler (2006)[27]
Retrospective chart review
CSCLR
21 eyes from 12 hyperopic patients
De Ortueta et al . (2006)[23]
Retrospective chart review
Corneal vertex with pupil tracker to maintain ablation position
Kermani et al . (2009)[24]
Retrospective comparative chart review
CSCLR compared to entrance pupil
Soler et al . (2011) [30]
Randomized prospective double masked comparison
CSCLR compared to entrance pupil
52 eyes of 27 hyperopic patients with a positive angle kappa 64 eyes centered on the CSCLR and 181 eyes centered on the entrance pupil.
30 eyes centered on the CSCLR 30 eyes centered on the entrance pupil
90% in the left eye. Optical zone decentration in the right eye of 0.7 mm. Optical zone decentration in the left eye of 0.2 mm UCVA of 20/20 or better in 44.4% of eyes and 20/25 or better in 88.9% of eyes. 65.6% of eyes within 0.50 diopters of target correction. Zero eyes lost more than two lines of BSCVA Mean UCVA improved from 20/70 to 20/32. Mean BSCVA went from 20/20 to 20/20-2. Zero eyes lost two or more lines of BSCVA. Mean amount of theoretical decentration from entrance pupil 0.45mm or 5.6° 100% of eyes had UCVA20/40. 94% of eyes within 0.50 dipoters of goal refraction. Zero eyes lost more than one line of BSCVA.
Visual axis group: (CSCLR) 73% of eyes had a UCVA of 0.8 (20/25) or better. 81% of the eyes within 0.5 diopters of target refraction. 6% of eyes gained two or more lines of sight BSCVA. Line of group: (entrance pupil) 73% of eyes had a UCVA of 0.8 (20/25) or better. 64% of eyes were within 0.5 diopters of target refraction. 3% of eyes gained two or more lines of BSCVA. Pupil centered group: 33.3% of eyes set for near and 53.3% of eyes set for distance achieved UCVA of 20/20. 73.3% of eyes were within 0.5 diopters of intended refraction. 93.3% of eyes had no loss of BSCVA. Vertex centered Group 40.0% of eyes set for near and 60.0% of eyes set for distance achieved UCVA of 20/20.
First to validate centering ablation zone over the CSCLR. Centering on the CSCLR does not adversley affect BSCVA or BSCCS Theoretical decentration from centering over the entrance pupil is significantly larger than decentration from centering on the CSCLR Validated the safety and efficacy of LASIK centered on the corneal vertex with pupil tracking in patients with a positive angle kappa. First large head to head study comparing centration on the CSCLR to the entrance pupil. Showed only minimal differences in the safety and efficacy between the two centration points.
No statistically significant differences in visual acuity outcomes between centration on the two points. Centering on the CSCLR produces a decrease in higher order aberrations which is not seen when centering on entrance pupil. Contd...
154
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology Ophthalmology,, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery
Table 2: Contd Author
Study type
Centration point used
# of eyes/ patients studied
Results
Significant findings
66.7% of eyes were within 0.5 diopters of intended refraction. 83.3% of eyes had no loss of BSCVA. Kanellopoulos
Prospective
[26]
group comparison
(2012)
CSCLR
202
Mean UDVA improved from
Centering on the
eyes of hyperopic patients
5.5/10 to 8.2/10. Mean BSCVA increased from 9.1/10 to 9.5/10. 94.4% of eyes within±1.00 diopters of refractive goal. 46.6% of eyes gained at least one line of Snellen acuity.
CSCLR leads to improvements in UCVA, BSCVA, and safety profile.
CSCLR: Coaxially sighted corneal light reflex, UDVA: Uncorrected distance visual acuity, BSCVA: Best spectacle corrected visual acuity, BSCCS: Best spectacle corrected contrast sensitivity, UCVA: Uncorrected visual acuity, D: Diopters, EP: Entrance pupil
hyperopes due to a large angle kappa, and also because hyperopes have smaller functional optical zones and less tolerance of decentration.[25] Several years later, Kanellopoulos also reported a good safety profile when centering on the CSCLR to accommodate for angle kappa. In addition, he reported a significant postoperative
on the pupil versus centration focused on the CSCLR in eyes with a positive angle kappa. Based on their previous experience the researchers centered the CSCLR group on a point midway between the line of sight and the corneal reflex. They reported only minimal differences in safety and efficacy between the two
improvement in uncorrected visual acuity and an increase in best spectacle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA).[26]
centration points. However, they did report a decrease in total higher order aberrations in the CSCLR group; this effect was not seen in the pupil centered group.[24]
Chan and Boxer Wachler measured the amount of post-operative decentration of ablation zones centered on the CSCLR in patients with a large angle kappa. This value was added to the preoperative angle kappa to represent the amount of decentration that would have occurred if the ablation had been centered on the entrance pupil. The theoretical decentration from entrance pupil centration was significantly larger than the decentration that actually occurred when centering on the corneal reflex.[27] Kermani reported a case of a patient with a large angle kappa who underwent LASIK with ablation centered on the entrance pupil. Postoperatively he had lost two lines of BSCVA, his hyperopia was under corrected, and astigmatic error was introduced. The patient later had a repeat procedure centered on the CSCLR. The refractive error was corrected and the BSCVA was restored.[28] The above reviewed studies helped establish the safety and efficacy of centering ablation profiles on or near the visual axis in patients with a large angle kappa. In 2003, a case report of a patient with bilateral large angle kappa provided the first direct comparison of centering on the entrance pupil versus centering on the CSCLR. He had LASIK centered on the entrance pupil in the right eye, and over the CSCLR in the left eye. The left eye demonstrated significantly better visual acuity, smaller refractive error, and a smaller amount of post-operative decentration.[29] While this case report was intriguing, it was not until 2009 that a larger study comparing the two methods was published. Kermani et al conducted a retrospective review of LASIK centered Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013 Oman Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol.
In 2011, Soler et al published the only randomized double masked comparison of pupil centered vs. corneal reflex centered hyperopic LASIK. This study concluded that there were no statistical differences in terms of safety, efficacy, or accuracy between the two different centration points[30] However, this study was limited by a small sample size and by a patient population of mild mil d to moderate hyperopes. The smaller angle kappa values associated with lower degrees of hyperopia may have masked prominent differences between the two centration options. From the current literature, several conclusions can be drawn. Angle kappa generally is larger in hyperopic patients. [3] A larger angle kappa increases the risk for decentration of the optical zone from the visual axis if ablation is i s centered over the entrance pupil. Such decentration can cause many optical problems, induce astigmatism,[26] and leave the patient’s visual deficits uncorrected. Thus, centering over the corneal reflex may decrease higher order aberrations which the patient is likely to appreciate.[30] We recommend using the corneal reflex reflex when performing LASIK on hyperopes, especially when they have a large angle kappa. Centering over a point half of the distance between the CSCLR and the pupil center may also be an effective method in angle kappa patients.[24] Using the entrance pupil when performing LASIK on myopes or mild hyperopes with a small angle kappa is safe and efficacious as the entrance pupil and CSCLR will nearly align. A large double masked head to head trial comparing the various centration techniques is needed to further guide this 155
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery debate. This study would be most helpful if it had a large array of hyperopes with multiple ranges of angle kappa values that could be individually analysed.
Angle kappa and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) There have been very few studies conducted concerning angle kappa and PRK. Many of these studies only indirectly address angle kappa by touching on principles of decentration in myopes or principles applied to hyperopic surgery where angle kappa is more prevalent. The results of these studies are summarized in Table 3. In 1993, Cavanaugh et al noted that angle lambda, the angle between the pupillary axis and the line of sight, could contribute to decentration error when performing PRK.[31] Angle kappa and angle lambda are nearly identical at distance fixation. [32] This study emphasized centering ablation zones for PRK over the entrance pupil as crucial to the success of the procedure.[31] However, it should be noted that this study was conducted on myopes, who are not as likely as hyperopes to have a large angle kappa.[3] In 1993, Cavanaugh et al published a separate study on PRK centered over the entrance pupil, which measured the average amount of decentration from the corneal vertex that occurs and resultant effects on visual acuity. They reported a positive correlation between preserved UCVA and BCVA in patients
whose decentration was less than 1.0 mm. [33] This would suggest that if PRK is centered on the entrance pupil in a patient with a large angle kappa, decentration may be insignificant if it is less than 1.0 mm. However, the relevance of this measurement is hard to extrapolate as the authors centered their procedures over the entrance pupil but then measured decentration from the corneal vertex. In 1998, Kim et al measured and compared the post-operative decentration of ablation zones in PRK using three different methods: 1) ablation zones centered on the corneal light reflex as viewed by both eyes of the surgeon, 2) ablation zones centered on the corneal reflex viewed with only the surgeon’s left eye, and 3) ablation zones centered on the entrance pupil viewed with only the surgeon’s left eye. The smallest amount of decentration was seen in the group which was centered on the entrance pupil viewed by the surgeons left eye. The largest decentration was seen when centered on the corneal reflex viewed by the surgeons left eye only. They attributed this result partly to a large angle kappa and misalignment, but mainly thought it to be a product misalignment of the fixation tube when viewing the patient’s right eye with the surgeon’s left eye.[34]
In 2012, Reinstein et al reported a case of PRK centered on the corneal vertex in a patient with a large vertical angle kappa. The patient had significant night vision disturbances after having
Table 3: Summary of articles relating angle kappa to PRK Author
Type of study
# of eyes/ patients studied
Method for centration
Results
Significant findings
Cavanaugh et al . (1993)[33]
Unmasked combined retrospective prospective evaluation of phase III clinical trial
110 myopic patients
Entrance pupil
Decentration less than 1.0 mm from conreal vertex in PRK likely has little effect on visual acuity.
Kim et al .
Prospective head to head trial
97 myopic patients
Case report
1 with haloes and starbursts
49 patients centered on the CSCLR viewed binocularly by the surgeon. 27 patients centered on the CSCLR viewed by surgeon’s left eye only. 21 patients centered on the entrance pupil viewed by the surgeon’s left eye only. Corneal vertex approximated by the
Mean UCVA was 20/20 for decentrations up to 1.00 mm. BCVA preserved to less than 2 lines of lost acuity if decentration was less than 1.00 mm. Average ablation zone decentation from corneal vertex of 0.52 mm. Mean decentration of 0.69±0.45 mm in the binocularly viewed corneal light reflex group. Mean decentration of 1.05±0.48 mm in the left eye viewing of the corneal light reflex group. Mean decentration of 0.63±0.28 mm in the entrance pupil centration group.
Whole eye higher order root mean square reduced by 43%. Corneal higher order root mean
Centration of PRK on CSCLR maybe more appropriate if corneal
after radial keratotomy
first Purkinje reflex.
square reduced by 61%. Patient reported large subjective improvement in visual symptoms.
surface is irregular.
[34]
(1998)
Reinstein et al . (2012)[35]
Greatest decentration in PRK is due to angle kappa and misalignment of the viewing tube and the patient’s eye.
UCVA: Uncorrected visual acuity, BCVA: Best corrected visual acuity, CSCLR: Coaxially sighted corneal light reflex
156
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology Ophthalmology,, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery radial keratotomy. keratotomy. The authors speculated that wave front guided profiles centered on his pupil would have been inappropriate for the irregular surface of his cornea and potentially could have made his symptoms worse. The corneal topography ablation profile centered on his corneal reflex addressed these irregularities and was better suited to fix his problem. PRK was performed using the profile centered on the corneal light reflex. The patient had improved visual results and a subjective reduction in his night vision disturbances.[35]
of induced ocular aberrations and asphericity, but there was no difference in photopic visual acuity.[40] In 2009 Okamoto et al compared myopic LASIK centered on the CSCLR with centration on the entrance pupil in 556 eyes with unknown angle kappa values. LASIK centered on the CSCLR was significantly safer, more effective, and had lower induction of coma and total higher order aberrations than LASIK treatments centered on the pupil.[39]
While investigating decentration patterns patterns in myopic patients that underwent PRK, Lin et al reported moving the ablation zone to a point half of the distance between the pupil center and the corneal reflex when the discrepancy between them (angle kappa) was more than 0.2 mm. This represented an undisclosed perce percentage ntage of the study population and they did not perform sub group analysis. However, they did report that moving the ablation zone such a small distance was tolerable for the patients.[36]
Angle kappa is of great importance i mportance in refractive surgery, surgery, particularly when treating hyperopes, who tend have large angle kappa values. In some instances, this may also be important for myopes. Angle kappa may play a role in MFIOL decentration, possibly leading to increased glare and haloes. This decentration may be clinically insignificant; however, centering the MFIOLs on the corneal reflex will likely decrease this risk. In hyperopic LASIK or PRK, centration should be focused on either the corneal reflex or the distance half way between pupillary center and the corneal reflex, especially in patients with a large angle kappa. Further studies are needed to fully establish the difference between the various centration methods used in refractive surgery and their effects on eyes with a large angle kappa.
Although centering PRK over the entrance pupil has not been specifically tested in patients with a large angle kappa, it has been tested in hyperopes which tend to have larger angle kappa values.[3] Dausch et al reported standard PRK with a 7.0 mm ablation zone centered over the entrance pupil to be efficient and relatively safe for correction of hyperopia up to 7.5 diopters. [37] They also reported that PRK with a 9.0 mm ablation zone centered over the entrance pupil is safe and efficient in treating hyperopia up to 8.25 diopters.[38] The data regarding angle kappa and PRK is very limited, and no specific conclusions can be drawn. This is likely to be due to the limited number of publications on the topic of angle kappa combined with the nationwide trend to perform LASIK more frequently than PRK. Although the limited data suggest that centering on the entrance pupil is safe and effective, this data comes largely from studies which only indirectly addressed the issue of angle kappa. Centering on the entrance pupil may be safe if the ablation zone is made large enough to cover the misalignment induced by angle kappa. The optical and refractive principles of PRK very closely mimic those used in LASIK. Given this similarity and the body of evidence which supports LASIK centration over the corneal reflex, we recommend centering PRK over the corneal reflex in patients with a large angle kappa.
Conclusions
Acknowledgement Special thanks to Cody Hockin, Graphic Designer, BFA Visual Communication, for his assistance in generation of Figure 1. This research resear ch received no specific grant from any funding agency in i n the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References 1.
Fotouhi A. Distribution of angle kappa measurements with Orbscan II in a population-based survey. survey. J Refract Surg 2010;26:966-71. 2.
3.
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
Basmak H, Sahin A, Yildirim Yildirim N, N, Papakostas TD, Kanellopoulos Kanellopoulos JA. JA. Measurement of angle kappa with synoptophore and Orbscan II in a normal population. J Refract Surg 2007;23:456-60.
4.
Pande M, Hillman Hillman JS. Optical Optical zone centration in keratorefractive surgery. Entrance pupil center, visual axis, coaxially sighted corneal re flex, or geometric corneal center? Ophthalmology 1993;100:1230-7.
Angle kappa and myopic LASIK
LASIK centered over the pupil to LASIK centered over the corneal vertex in 52 myopic patients with a moderate to large angle kappa. The corneal vertex centered treatments performed better in terms
Park CY, Oh SY SY,, Chuck RS. Measurement Measurement of angle angle kappa and centration in refractive surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2012;23:269-75.
5.
It may also necessary to consider angle kappa in centration for treatment in myopic patients. It has been suggested by Okamoto et al that approximately 30% of myopic refractive surgery candidates have an angle kappa large enough to warrant centering closer to the visual axis.[39] However, other authors have suggested that angle kappa in myopia is usually negligible.[19,25] A full discussion of the centration techniques in myopia is beyond the scope of o f this article but two studies deserve mention. Arbelaez et al compared
Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob Khabazkhoob M, Yazdani Yazdani K, Mehravaran Mehravaran S, S, Jafarzadejpur Jafarzadejpur E,
Prakash G, Prakash DR, Agarwal A, Kumar DA, DA, Agarwal A, Jacob S. Predictive factor and kappa angle analysis for visual satisfactions in patients with multifocal I OL implantation. Eye (Lond) 2011;25:1187-93.
6.
Hayashi K, Hayashi Hayashi H, Nakao Nakao F, F, Hayashi F. Correlation between between pupillary size and intraocular lens decentration and visual acuity of a zonal-progressive multifocal lens and a monofocal lens. Ophthalmology 2001;108:2011-7.
7.
Kermani O, Schmeidt Schmeidt K, Oberheide U, Gerten Gerten Gl. Hyperopic laser in in situ keratomileusis with 5.5-, 6.5-, and 7.0-mm optical zones. J Refract Surg 2005;21:52-8.
8.
Srivannaboon S, Chotikavanich Chotikavanich S. Corneal characteristics in myopic myopic patients. J Med Assoc Thai 2005;88:1222-7.
9.
Basmak H, Sahin A, Yildirim N, Saricice k T, Yurdakul S. The angle kappa in strabismic individuals. Strabismus 2007;15:193-6.
10.
Zarei-Ghanavati S, Gharaee Gharaee H, Eslampour Eslampour A, Abrishami M, GhasemiGhasemi-
157
[Downloaded free from http://www.ojoonline.org http://www.ojoonline.org on Wednesday, Wednesday, April 09, 2014, IP: 189.15.238.204] || Click here to download free Android application for this journa
Moshirfar, et al .: .: Angle kappa and refractive surgery Moghadam S. Angle kappa changes after photorefractive keratectomy for
astigmatism femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK: Long-term experience with the 400 Hz eye-Q excimer platform. Clin Ophthalmol 2012;6:895-901.
myopia. Int Ophthalmol 2013. [In press] 11.
Berrio E, Tabernero J, Artal P. P. Optical aberrations and alignment of the eye
27.
12.
Leysen I, Bartholomeeusen E, Coeckelbergh Coeckelbergh T, Tassignon Tassignon MJ. Surgical outcomes of intraocular lens exchange: Five-year study. J Cataract
28.
Woodward MA, Randleman Randleman JB, Stulting Stulting RD. Dissatisfaction after multifocal
29.
intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009;35:992-7. 14.
et al .
Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal
30.
intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011;37:859-65. Rosales P, P, De Castro A, Jiménez-alfaro Jiménez-alfaro I, Marcos S. Intraocular lens
15.
alignment from purkinje and Scheimp flug imaging. Clin Exp Optom
31.
33.
sciences. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 1980. p. 72. Cavanaugh TB, Durrie DS, Riedel Riedel SM, Hunkeler JD, Lesher MP. MP. Topographical analysis of the centration of excimer laser photorefractive
Solomon R, Donnenfeld ED, Perry HD, Stein JJ, Su MY, MY, Holladay, JT. Argon laser iridoplasty to improve visual function following multifocal IOL
18.
34.
of corneal centering in photorefractive keratectomy. Yonsei Med J
12, 2007; New Orleans, LA.
1998;39:317-21. Reinstein DZ, DZ, Archer Archer TJ, Gobbe Gobbe M. Is topography-guided ablation profile
Melki SA, Harissi-dagher Harissi-dagher M. Coaxially sighted intraocular intraocular lens light
35.
centered on the corneal vertex better than wavefront-guided ablation
Ophthalmol 2011;46:31 2011;46:319-21. 9-21. 19.
Uozato H, Guyton DL. Centering Centering corneal surgical procedures. procedures. Am J
20.
Ophthalmol 1987;103:264-75. Enoch JM, Laties AM. An analysis of retinal receptor orientation. II. Predictions for psychophysical tests. Invest Ophthalmol 1971;10:959-70. Mandell RB. Apparent pupil displacement displacement in videokeratography. videokeratography. CLAO J 1994;20:123-7.
22.
36.
De Ortueta D, D, Schreyger FD. Centration on the cornea vertex normal
Suppl:149-54. 37.
Dausch D, Klein R, R, Schröder E. Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy for hyperopia. Refract Corneal Surg 1993;9:20-8.
38.
Dausch D, Smecka Z, Klein R, Schröder Schröder E, Kirchner Sl. Sl. Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy for hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 1997;23:169-76.
39.
Refract Surg 2007;23:198-200. Kermani O, Oberheide U, Schmiedt K, Gerten Gerten G, Bains Bains HS. Outcomes Outcomes of hyperopic LASIK with the NIDEK NAVEX platform centered on the visual axis or line of sight. J Refract Surg 2009;25 Suppl 1:S98-103. 25.
centration on the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004;30:1281-6.
158
40.
Arbelaez MC, Vidal Vidal C, Arba-mosquera S. Clinical Clinical outcomes of corneal vertex versus central pupil references with aberration-free ablation strategies and LASIK. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:5287-94.
Nepomuceno RL, RL, Boxer Wachler Wachler BS, Kim Kim JM, Scruggs R, Sato Ml. Ml. Laser in situ keratomileusis for hyperopia with the LADAR Vision 4000 with
26.
Okamoto S, Kimura K, Funakura M, Ikeda N, Hiramatsu H, Bains HS. Comparison of myopic LASIK centered on the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex or line of sight. J Refract Surg 2009;25 Suppl 10:S944-50.
during hyperopic refractive photoablation using videokeratoscopy. J 24.
profile centered on the entrance pupil? J Refract Surg 2012;28:139-43. Lin DT, DT, Sutton HF, HF, Berman M. Corneal topography following following excimer photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993;19
Fay AM, Trokel SL, Myers JA. JA. Pupil diameter and the principal principal ray. ray. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992;18:348-51.
23.
keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993;19 Suppl:136-43. Kim EK, Jang JW, JW, Lee JB, Hong SB, Lee YG, Kim Kim HB. Comparison
implantation. Poster presented at: The AAO Annual Meeting; November
reflex for centration of the multifocal single piece intraocular lens. Can J
21.
Cavanaugh TB, Durrie DS, Riedel Riedel SM, Hunkeler JD, Lesher MP. MP. Centration of excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy relative to the Legrand Y, El Hage SG. SG. Physiologic optics. In: Springer series series in optical
2013 Oct 4]. 17.
A
32.
[monograph on the internet]. Ophthalmology Times, 2012. p. 28-9. Available from: http://digital.healthcaregroup.advanstar http://digital.healthcaregroup.advanstar.com .com [Last cited
et al .
pupil. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993;19 Suppl:S144-8.
Berdahl JP, JP, Waring GO. GO. Match right lens to patient patient needs: 10 objective measurements can improve multifocal IOL implantation outcomes
Soler V, Benito A, Soler P, P, Triozon C, Arné JL, Madariag a V, V,
randomized comparison of pupil-centered versus vertex-centered ablation in LASIK correction of hyperopia. Am J Ophthalmol 2011;152:591-9.e2. 2011;152:591-9.e2.
2010;93:400-8. 16.
Wachler BS, BS, Korn TS, TS, Chandra NS, NS, Michel FK. Decentration of the optical zone: centering on the pupil versus the coaxially sighted corneal light reflex in LASIK for hyperopia. J Refract Surg 2003;19:464-5.
De Vries NE, Webers CA, Touwslager WR, Bauer Bauer NJ, De Branbander Branbander J, Berendschot TT,
2006;22:467-71. Kermani O. Alignment in customized laser in situ keratomileusis. keratomileusis. J Refract Refract Surg 2004;20 Suppl 5: S651-8.
Refract Surg 2009;35:1013-8. 13.
Chan CC, Boxer Wachler Wachler BS. Centration analysis of ablation ablation over the coaxial corneal light re flex for hyperopic LASIK. J Refract Surg
with age. J Vis 2010;10:34.
Kanellopoulos
AJ.
Topography-guided
hyperopic
and
hyperopic
Cite this article as: Moshirfar as: Moshirfar M, Hoggan RN, Muthappan V. Angle Kappa and its importance in r efractive surgery. Oman J Ophthalmol 2013;6:151-8. Source of Support: Nil, Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None Interest: None declared.
Oman Journal of Ophthalmology Ophthalmology,, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2013
