Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2023
Ten-year follow-up of corneal cross-linking and refractive surface ablation in patients with asymmetric corneal topography.
Рандомизированное 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.
Moscovici Bernardo Kaplan, Rodrigues Pablo Felipe, Dantas Marcos Paulo Suehiro, Okimoto Juliana Taemy, Naves Obidulho Sakassegawa, Taguchi Felipe Marques de Carvalho, Malta João Baptista Nigro Santiago, Campos Mauro
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Compare the safety and efficacy of wavefront-guided photorefractive keratotomy (PRK) 6 months after cross-linking (CXL) to wavefront-guided PRK alone for refractive correction in patients with bilateral asymmetric corneal topography.
METHODS: Prospective randomized clinical trial with 16 patients (32 eyes). CXL with subsequent PRK after 6 months in one eye, and PRK alone was performed in contralateral eyes. The follow-up was 10 years. We analyzed visual outcomes, Scheimpflug topography, and corneal haze evaluation.
RESULTS: Eyes in the PRK group showed better results than in the CXL + PRK group. Mean postoperative CDVA was 0.044 logmar (SD, 0.073) in the PRK group and 0.1 logmar (SD, 0.21) in the CXL + PRK group, the mean sphere was + 0.21 (SD, 0.6) D in the PRK group and 0.87 (SD, 2.3) D in the CXL + PRK group, and mean SE was -0.35 (SD, 0.65) D in the PRK group and 0.62 (SD, 2.32) D in the CXL + PRK group. In one patient, a steepening of 2.5 D and a thinning of 17 μm occurred in PRK alone group. Two patients in the CXL + PRK group presented corneal haze. The overall complication rate was 18,75% (haze and ectasia).
CONCLUSION: Non-simultaneous CXL and PRK procedures yielded good refractive results, but worse than those obtained with PRK alone. Although one patient in the PRK group developed corneal ectasia, the CXL + PRK group had a higher loss of vision lines, indicating less safety.
METHODS: Prospective randomized clinical trial with 16 patients (32 eyes). CXL with subsequent PRK after 6 months in one eye, and PRK alone was performed in contralateral eyes. The follow-up was 10 years. We analyzed visual outcomes, Scheimpflug topography, and corneal haze evaluation.
RESULTS: Eyes in the PRK group showed better results than in the CXL + PRK group. Mean postoperative CDVA was 0.044 logmar (SD, 0.073) in the PRK group and 0.1 logmar (SD, 0.21) in the CXL + PRK group, the mean sphere was + 0.21 (SD, 0.6) D in the PRK group and 0.87 (SD, 2.3) D in the CXL + PRK group, and mean SE was -0.35 (SD, 0.65) D in the PRK group and 0.62 (SD, 2.32) D in the CXL + PRK group. In one patient, a steepening of 2.5 D and a thinning of 17 μm occurred in PRK alone group. Two patients in the CXL + PRK group presented corneal haze. The overall complication rate was 18,75% (haze and ectasia).
CONCLUSION: Non-simultaneous CXL and PRK procedures yielded good refractive results, but worse than those obtained with PRK alone. Although one patient in the PRK group developed corneal ectasia, the CXL + PRK group had a higher loss of vision lines, indicating less safety.