Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 1999
Photorefractive keratectomy in keratoconus suspects.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Sun R, Gimbel H V, Kaye G B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the refractive outcome after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in keratoconus-suspect patients with that in patients with normal corneal topography.
SETTING: Gimbel Eye Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
METHOD: In a retrospective study, 3 patients (5 eyes) with unusually shaped corneal topography before surgery were selected as keratoconus suspects. Corneal topography (inferior-superior [I-S] value, central corneal power, and central power difference between both eyes), preoperative and 1 year postoperative refraction, and visual acuity in the keratoconus suspects were compared with those in a control group.
RESULTS: The mean preoperative I-S value was 1.79 diopters (D) in the keratoconus-suspect eyes and 0.35 D in the control group eyes (P = .0001). The I-S value of individual corneas in the keratoconus suspects was more than 2 standard deviations above the mean in the control group except in 1 eye in which the steepened area was located in the central cornea. The central power difference between the eyes of this patient was 3.60 D, which was significantly higher than that in the control group. The refractive outcomes in the keratoconus suspects were comparable to those in the control group.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the refractive outcomes after PRK in the keratoconus suspects and controls were comparable. However, further investigation with a larger sample and longer follow-up is needed.
SETTING: Gimbel Eye Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
METHOD: In a retrospective study, 3 patients (5 eyes) with unusually shaped corneal topography before surgery were selected as keratoconus suspects. Corneal topography (inferior-superior [I-S] value, central corneal power, and central power difference between both eyes), preoperative and 1 year postoperative refraction, and visual acuity in the keratoconus suspects were compared with those in a control group.
RESULTS: The mean preoperative I-S value was 1.79 diopters (D) in the keratoconus-suspect eyes and 0.35 D in the control group eyes (P = .0001). The I-S value of individual corneas in the keratoconus suspects was more than 2 standard deviations above the mean in the control group except in 1 eye in which the steepened area was located in the central cornea. The central power difference between the eyes of this patient was 3.60 D, which was significantly higher than that in the control group. The refractive outcomes in the keratoconus suspects were comparable to those in the control group.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the refractive outcomes after PRK in the keratoconus suspects and controls were comparable. However, further investigation with a larger sample and longer follow-up is needed.