PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for residual refractive errors in patients who had previous insertion of intrastromal corneal ring segments (Intacs, Addition Technology, Inc.) for treatment of low myopia. SETTING: Shiley Eye Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. METHODS: This retrospective case series comprised patients who had Intacs segment implantation and subsequently developed myopic regression. Eight eyes of 5 patients had PRK over the Intacs in situ for the correction of the residual refractive error. RESULTS: Six (75%) of the 8 eyes had plano refraction with 20/20 or better uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) 1 month after PRK enhancement. Three months postoperatively, all eyes had plano refraction with 20/20 or better acuity. At the last follow-up examination (up to 2 years), all eyes had near plano vision (20/10 to 20/25). The corneal surface epithelium in all eyes healed in 3 to 5 days. One patient had subepithelial haze in both eyes, which resolved with epithelial scraping with mitomycin-C (MMC) application and a phototherapeutic keratectomy enhancement. CONCLUSIONS: This small series showed that PRK can be used to treat residual refractive error after Intacs insertion. The UCVA was 20/25 or better in all cases after PRK enhancement. The incidence of post-PRK haze in this series of patients was high; topical MMC might be used in future cases to mitigate the problem.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for residual refractive errors in patients who had previous insertion of intrastromal corneal ring segments (Intacs, Addition Technology, Inc.) for treatment of low myopia. SETTING: Shiley Eye Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. METHODS: This retrospective case series comprised patients who had Intacs segment implantation and subsequently developed myopic regression. Eight eyes of 5 patients had PRK over the Intacs in situ for the correction of the residual refractive error. RESULTS: Six (75%) of the 8 eyes had plano refraction with 20/20 or better uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) 1 month after PRK enhancement. Three months postoperatively, all eyes had plano refraction with 20/20 or better acuity. At the last follow-up examination (up to 2 years), all eyes had near plano vision (20/10 to 20/25). The corneal surface epithelium in all eyes healed in 3 to 5 days. One patient had subepithelial haze in both eyes, which resolved with epithelial scraping with mitomycin-C (MMC) application and a phototherapeutic keratectomy enhancement. CONCLUSIONS: This small series showed that PRK can be used to treat residual refractive error after Intacs insertion. The UCVA was 20/25 or better in all cases after PRK enhancement. The incidence of post-PRK haze in this series of patients was high; topical MMC might be used in future cases to mitigate the problem.