|
Fast, Faster, FemtoFastest
With the new 4th Generation IntraLase® FS laser, procedure times are significantly faster—flap creation may now be performed in about 15 seconds.(1)
*Data on file, IntraLase Corp. 2006.
†Equivalent flap size and depth, optimized spot line separation, and pocket option disabled for each sample.
Reference:
1. Data on file, IntraLase Corp.
The 4th Generation IntraLase® FS Laser:
Speed, Biomechanical Stability, Precision, and Safety
The 4th Generation IntraLase laser works with microkeratome speed and laser precision. Corneal flap creation is faster and better than ever. This technology preserves biomechanical stability, increases precision, enhances safety, and improves outcomes of the LASIK procedure. (1-4)
Faster procedure time
- The 4th Generation IntraLase FS laser works with the speed of a microkeratome*(1)
Predictability and control
- Better biomechanical stability vs. a microkeratome(2)
Precision to improve outcomes
- Better early visual outcomes vs. a microkeratome(3)
- Better refractive outcomes vs. a microkeratome(4)
- Better early contrast acuity recovery vs. a microkeratome(3)
Greater safety
- Lower induced high-order aberrations vs. a microkeratome(4)
- Less induction of astigmatism vs. a microkeratome(4)
- Less induced dry eye vs. a microkeratome(5)
- Fewer retreatments vs. procedures performed with a microkeratome(6)
*Fast refers to procedure time and is defined as the time from device setup to the moment the corneal bed is ready for ablation.(1)
References:
1. Davis E. Data on file, IntraLase Corp. 2006.
2. Alió JL, Ortiz D, Piñero D. Flap biomechanics with femtosecond and mechanical microkeratomes. Data presented at: European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons; September 10-14, 2005; Lisbon, Portugal.
3. Tanzer DJ, Schallhorn SC, Brown MC, et al. Comparison of visual outcomes with femtosecond and mechanical microkeratomes for wavefront-guided LASIK. Data presented at: Joint Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology & the International Society of Refractive Surgery; October 23, 2004; New Orleans, La; October 14, 2005; Chicago, Ill.
4. Durrie DS, Kezirian GM. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical keratome flaps in wavefront-guided in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005:31;120-126.
5. Shamie N. Post-LASIK Corneal Hypoesthesia and Dry Eye. Data presented at: Congress of the American Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgery; April 12-16, 2003; San Francisco, Calif.
6. Manger C. Enhancement Rates of IntraLase Laser and microkeratome-assisted LASIK. Data presented at: Congress of the American Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgery; May 2, 2004; San Diego, Calif.
Create Anatomically Correct Flap Creation With the IntraLase Method™*(1)
| | IntraLase | Microkeratome |
| Flap Shape/ Diameter | Planar flap† | Meniscus-shaped flaps |
| Hinge Size and Shape |
Software settings can be adjusted and tailored.
The use of a stromal pocket allows the flap to be retracted further, thus making more surface area available for a flap of any given diameter. |
A D-shaped stromal bed is created, leaving less room for the flap diameter. |
| Side Cut Angle |
The side cut angle can be varied from 0º to 90º.
An increased side cut angle can allow the flap to seat more easily and, more importantly, create a powerful barrier to epithelial cell migration. |
Edge configuration is 25º to 35º—a necessary angle with a blade to avoid deep penetration or anterior perforation. |
| Flap Thickness |
Predictable:
Corneal applanation provides a fixed reference plane |
Variable and may be affected by:
An oscillating blade
Corneal curvature
Keratome translation speed |
†Evidence shows that planar flaps may offer better refractive outcomes, as less induced cylinder and higher-order aberrations seem to occur when compared to meniscus-shaped flaps created by mechanical microkeratomes.(2-4)
*Only the IntraLase® FS laser can be used to perform the IntraLase Method.
References:
1. Talamo JH. Optimizing flap outcomes with the IntraLase FS laser. Ophthalmol Management. May 2004.
2. Kezirian GM, Stonecipher KG. Comparison of the IntraLase femtosecond laser and mechanical keratomes for laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:804-811.
3. Durrie DS, Kezirian GM. Femtosecond laser versus mechanical keratome flaps in wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis: prospective contralateral eye study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:120-126.
4. Tran DB, Sarayba MA, Bor Z, et al. Randomized prospective clinical study comparing induced aberrations with IntraLase and Hansatome flap creation in fellow eyes: potential impact on wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:97-105.
|
|
6950 Friars Road
Suite #100
San Diego, CA 92108
18632 Beach Blvd.
Suite #100
Huntington Beach,
CA 92648
800.GET-LASIK
|
|
All Rights Reserved 
