What the Data Means in Practice
The Dair study above explains why our 213nm wavelength behaves differently on the eye than the 193nm excimer wavelength: it’s absorbed far less by fluid, which is why fluctuations in corneal hydration are unlikely to significantly affect ablation performance.
This same wavelength sits close to the absorption peak of corneal collagen, contributing to efficient, clean ablation with no evidence of thermal effect. Combined with our small spot size, homogeneous Gaussian beam profile, and high repetition rate, this is
the physical basis for the outcomes reported in the two studies above.
Want the complete study data sent to you?







