BMC ophthalmology · 2023
Laser in situ keratomileusis versus Artisan lens implantation in correcting ametropia after penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Feizi Sepehr, Javadi Mohammad Ali, Bineshfar Niloufar, Esfandiari Hamed
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with Artisan phakic intraocular lens implantation to correct refractive errors after penetrating keratoplasty (PK) for keratoconus.
METHODS: This retrospective comparative interventional case series included a total of 33 consecutive keratoconus eyes that had previous PK and received subsequent LASIK (n = 16) or Artisan lens implantation (n = 17) were included in this study. Outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refractive error, and complications.
RESULTS: Postoperatively, the UDVA of ≥20/40 was achieved in none of the LASIK group compared to 62.5% of eyes in the Artisan group (P < 0.001); the respective values for CDVA of ≥20/40 were 87.5 and 94.1% (P = 0.51). Spherical equivalent refraction decreased from - 6.97 ± 1.50 D preoperatively to - 4.20 ± 2.05 D postoperatively in the LASIK group (P < 0.001) and from - 10.79 ± 2.15 D preoperatively to - 2.13 ± 1.23 D postoperatively in the Artisan group (P < 0.001). There was no significant change in the refractive astigmatism in LASIK group (P = 0.30) or Artisan group (P = 0.11). The efficacy and safety indices were significantly better for Artisan (0.82 ± 0.34 and 1.13 ± 0.30, respectively) than for LASIK (0.22 ± 0.17 and 0.85 ± 0.24, respectively, P ≤ 0.006 for both comparisons). While refractive error changed significantly from postoperative year 3 to the final visit in the LASIK group, it remained stable in the Artisan group through follow-up period. No significant complications were observed in any group.
CONCLUSION: Artisan lens implantation provided superior and stable visual outcomes compared to LASIK for the management of post PK refractive errors in keratoconus eyes.
METHODS: This retrospective comparative interventional case series included a total of 33 consecutive keratoconus eyes that had previous PK and received subsequent LASIK (n = 16) or Artisan lens implantation (n = 17) were included in this study. Outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refractive error, and complications.
RESULTS: Postoperatively, the UDVA of ≥20/40 was achieved in none of the LASIK group compared to 62.5% of eyes in the Artisan group (P < 0.001); the respective values for CDVA of ≥20/40 were 87.5 and 94.1% (P = 0.51). Spherical equivalent refraction decreased from - 6.97 ± 1.50 D preoperatively to - 4.20 ± 2.05 D postoperatively in the LASIK group (P < 0.001) and from - 10.79 ± 2.15 D preoperatively to - 2.13 ± 1.23 D postoperatively in the Artisan group (P < 0.001). There was no significant change in the refractive astigmatism in LASIK group (P = 0.30) or Artisan group (P = 0.11). The efficacy and safety indices were significantly better for Artisan (0.82 ± 0.34 and 1.13 ± 0.30, respectively) than for LASIK (0.22 ± 0.17 and 0.85 ± 0.24, respectively, P ≤ 0.006 for both comparisons). While refractive error changed significantly from postoperative year 3 to the final visit in the LASIK group, it remained stable in the Artisan group through follow-up period. No significant complications were observed in any group.
CONCLUSION: Artisan lens implantation provided superior and stable visual outcomes compared to LASIK for the management of post PK refractive errors in keratoconus eyes.