Eye & contact lens · 2024
Effect of Astigmatism Treatment With Three Excimer Lasers After Photorefractive Keratectomy.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sedaghat Mohammad-Reza, Sadeghi Javad, Varshovi-Jaghargh Iman, Heravian Javad, Belin Michael W, Momeni-Moghaddam Hamed
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare astigmatism correction after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) using three excimer laser devices, Alcon Wavelight EX500, Schwind Amaris 1,050, and Technolas Teneo317 M2.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 414 eyes from 414 subjects with a history of PRK performed using Alcon Wavelight (n=172), Schwind Amaris (n=122), and Technolas (n=120). Uncorrected & corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA & CDVA), and refractive status (spherical equivalent (SE) and vector analysis (J0 and J45)) were postoperatively recorded at the 6-month and 12-month examinations.
RESULTS: The mean CDVA and J45 at 6-month and 12-month showed no statistically significant difference among the three different excimer lasers ( P >0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in mean UDVA and J0 at 6-month and 12-month after PRK among the three groups, with no statistically significant difference between Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris lasers, while both of the prior lasers showed a significant difference with the Technolas laser. The highest and lowest changes in the magnitude of J0 in 6-month and 12-month follow-ups were seen for the Alcon Wavelight and Technolas groups, respectively. Both Schwind Amaris and Technolas had a small hyperopic SE while the Alcon Wavelight's SE was minimally myopic. This difference in SE between Alcon Wavelight and both Schwind Amaris and Technolas reached statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: While all three lasers performed well in reducing preoperative astigmatism; however, the Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris were more effective in correcting astigmatism than the Technolas. The difference between the Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris did not reach statistical significance.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 414 eyes from 414 subjects with a history of PRK performed using Alcon Wavelight (n=172), Schwind Amaris (n=122), and Technolas (n=120). Uncorrected & corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA & CDVA), and refractive status (spherical equivalent (SE) and vector analysis (J0 and J45)) were postoperatively recorded at the 6-month and 12-month examinations.
RESULTS: The mean CDVA and J45 at 6-month and 12-month showed no statistically significant difference among the three different excimer lasers ( P >0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in mean UDVA and J0 at 6-month and 12-month after PRK among the three groups, with no statistically significant difference between Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris lasers, while both of the prior lasers showed a significant difference with the Technolas laser. The highest and lowest changes in the magnitude of J0 in 6-month and 12-month follow-ups were seen for the Alcon Wavelight and Technolas groups, respectively. Both Schwind Amaris and Technolas had a small hyperopic SE while the Alcon Wavelight's SE was minimally myopic. This difference in SE between Alcon Wavelight and both Schwind Amaris and Technolas reached statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: While all three lasers performed well in reducing preoperative astigmatism; however, the Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris were more effective in correcting astigmatism than the Technolas. The difference between the Alcon Wavelight and Schwind Amaris did not reach statistical significance.