Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2020
Efficacy and safety of cross-cylinder photorefractive keratectomy versus single method in medium-high astigmatism: a randomized clinical trial.
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.
Sedghipour Mohammad R, Lotfi Afshin, Sadeghilar Ayaz, Banan Saeeid
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To compare efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) by crosscylinder with single methods in medium-high astigmatism.
DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial study PARTICIPANTS: Fifty patients with medium-high compound myopic astigmatism were enrolled between September 2007 and September 2008.
METHODS: PRK was performed on 100 eyes of 50 patients with compound myopic astigmatism. Each patient underwent PRK by cross-cylinder approach in one eye and single method on the contralateral eye. Vector analysis was used to assess astigmatic results.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement of visual acuity (snelen chart), refraction, aberrometry.
RESULTS: Uncorrected visual acuity (UCCA) equal to 20/40 or better after six months, was achieved in 98% of eyes in the cross-cylinder method versus 96% in single method.. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent(SE) was -5.2 ±2.1 D in the cross-cylinder method versus -5.1 ±0.5 D in the single method. At six months, the mean SE was - 0.5±0.4 D and -0.6±0.3 D, respectively. Mean IOS was 0.4±0.3 in the cross-cylinder group and 0.4±0.4 in the single group. Mean postoperative absolute change in total root-mean-square higher order aberrations in the cross-cylinder group and single group were 0.16 pm and 0.17 pm, respectively. Any of the mentioned differences didn't appear to be statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Both PRK methods appeared to be safe and effective in correcting medium-high astigmatism.
DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial study PARTICIPANTS: Fifty patients with medium-high compound myopic astigmatism were enrolled between September 2007 and September 2008.
METHODS: PRK was performed on 100 eyes of 50 patients with compound myopic astigmatism. Each patient underwent PRK by cross-cylinder approach in one eye and single method on the contralateral eye. Vector analysis was used to assess astigmatic results.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement of visual acuity (snelen chart), refraction, aberrometry.
RESULTS: Uncorrected visual acuity (UCCA) equal to 20/40 or better after six months, was achieved in 98% of eyes in the cross-cylinder method versus 96% in single method.. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent(SE) was -5.2 ±2.1 D in the cross-cylinder method versus -5.1 ±0.5 D in the single method. At six months, the mean SE was - 0.5±0.4 D and -0.6±0.3 D, respectively. Mean IOS was 0.4±0.3 in the cross-cylinder group and 0.4±0.4 in the single group. Mean postoperative absolute change in total root-mean-square higher order aberrations in the cross-cylinder group and single group were 0.16 pm and 0.17 pm, respectively. Any of the mentioned differences didn't appear to be statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Both PRK methods appeared to be safe and effective in correcting medium-high astigmatism.