International ophthalmology · 2020
Comparison between aberration-free transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy and small incision lenticule extraction for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.
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.
Zheng Zhiyuan, Zhang Mingzhi, Jhanji Vishal, Sun Lixia, Li Jinyu, Zhang Riping
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and aberration-free transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (AF t-PRK) in patients with low to moderate myopic astigmatism, including visual acuity, refractive outcomes, astigmatic vector analysis and corneal aberrometric changes.
METHOD: This retrospective comparative case series study involved 110 right eyes of 110 patients who underwent either SMILE (55 eyes) or AF t-PRK (55 eyes). Visual acuity, manifest refractive error and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were measured and analyzed at baseline, 1 month and 3 months after operation. The safety and efficacy indices, and vector parameters were also compared.
RESULT: 1 month postoperatively, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and spherical equivalent refraction (SE) were better after SMILE than AF t-PRK (logMAR UDVA, - 0.03 ± 0.07 and - 0.006 ± 0.07, P = 0.050; logMAR CDVA, - 0.06 ± 0.07 and - 0.03 ± 0.07, P = 0.043; SE, - 0.04 ± 0.25 and 0.15 ± 0.26, P < 0.001). However, these parameters were comparable between the groups at 3 months after surgery. Residual astigmatism ≤ 0.25 diopters was observed in 74.5% and 90.9% (P = 0.023) of the eyes at one month and in 87.3% and 85.5% (P = 0.781) of the eyes at 3 months after SMILE and AF t-PRK, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the vector parameters at 1 month or 3 months after surgery. Coma and total HOAs after SMILE were significantly higher than AF t-PRK (1 month coma, 0.49 ± 0.23 and 0.29 ± 0.15, P < 0.001; 1 month total RMS HOAs, 0.65 ± 0.20 and 0.54 ± 0.14, P = 0.001; 3 months coma, 0.50 ± 0.22 and 0.30 ± 0.17, P < 0.001; 3 months total RMS HOAs, 0.68 ± 0.20 and 0.55 ± 0.17, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In this study, both SMILE and AF t-PRK were effective and comparable for correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism. AF t-PRK group induced less coma and total HOAs than SMILE.
METHOD: This retrospective comparative case series study involved 110 right eyes of 110 patients who underwent either SMILE (55 eyes) or AF t-PRK (55 eyes). Visual acuity, manifest refractive error and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were measured and analyzed at baseline, 1 month and 3 months after operation. The safety and efficacy indices, and vector parameters were also compared.
RESULT: 1 month postoperatively, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and spherical equivalent refraction (SE) were better after SMILE than AF t-PRK (logMAR UDVA, - 0.03 ± 0.07 and - 0.006 ± 0.07, P = 0.050; logMAR CDVA, - 0.06 ± 0.07 and - 0.03 ± 0.07, P = 0.043; SE, - 0.04 ± 0.25 and 0.15 ± 0.26, P < 0.001). However, these parameters were comparable between the groups at 3 months after surgery. Residual astigmatism ≤ 0.25 diopters was observed in 74.5% and 90.9% (P = 0.023) of the eyes at one month and in 87.3% and 85.5% (P = 0.781) of the eyes at 3 months after SMILE and AF t-PRK, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the vector parameters at 1 month or 3 months after surgery. Coma and total HOAs after SMILE were significantly higher than AF t-PRK (1 month coma, 0.49 ± 0.23 and 0.29 ± 0.15, P < 0.001; 1 month total RMS HOAs, 0.65 ± 0.20 and 0.54 ± 0.14, P = 0.001; 3 months coma, 0.50 ± 0.22 and 0.30 ± 0.17, P < 0.001; 3 months total RMS HOAs, 0.68 ± 0.20 and 0.55 ± 0.17, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In this study, both SMILE and AF t-PRK were effective and comparable for correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism. AF t-PRK group induced less coma and total HOAs than SMILE.