PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative efficacy, safety, and higher-order-aberrations (HOAs) between transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and alcohol-assisted PRK in contralateral eyes. SETTING: Private clinic, Utrecht, The Netherlands. DESIGN: Comparative case series. METHODS: Consecutive patients were randomized to have transepithelial PRK in 1 eye and alcohol-assisted PRK in the contralateral eye. In both eyes, aspheric treatments were planned with Custom Ablation Manager software and ablations performed with the Schwind Amaris system. Clinical outcomes were predictability, refraction, visual acuity, wavefront aberrations, and contrast and glare sensitivity. Paired t tests were applied for statistics. RESULTS: The study evaluated 66 eyes (33 patients). All patients completed the 1-year follow-up. At 1-year, 97% of eyes in both groups achieved an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 0.1 logMAR or better. No eye lost 2 or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA); 97% of transepithelial PRK eyes and 91% of alcohol-assisted PRK eyes were within ±0.50 diopter (D) of the targeted refraction. The postoperative mean spherical equivalent was +0.07 D ± 0.23 (SD) and +0.01 ± 0.27 D, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The CDVA, UDVA, and safety outcomes between transepithelial PRK and alcohol-assisted PRK were comparable. Profiles for both techniques applied to regular corneas preserved the eye's natural HOAs. Transepithelial PRK is faster to perform and it is an all-laser procedure, which might be less stressful for the patient. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Mr. Ewering and Mr. Arba-Mosquera are employees of Schwind eye-tech-solutions. Dr. Luger has no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative efficacy, safety, and higher-order-aberrations (HOAs) between transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and alcohol-assisted PRK in contralateral eyes. SETTING: Private clinic, Utrecht, The Netherlands. DESIGN: Comparative case series. METHODS: Consecutive patients were randomized to have transepithelial PRK in 1 eye and alcohol-assisted PRK in the contralateral eye. In both eyes, aspheric treatments were planned with Custom Ablation Manager software and ablations performed with the Schwind Amaris system. Clinical outcomes were predictability, refraction, visual acuity, wavefront aberrations, and contrast and glare sensitivity. Paired t tests were applied for statistics. RESULTS: The study evaluated 66 eyes (33 patients). All patients completed the 1-year follow-up. At 1-year, 97% of eyes in both groups achieved an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 0.1 logMAR or better. No eye lost 2 or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA); 97% of transepithelial PRK eyes and 91% of alcohol-assisted PRK eyes were within ±0.50 diopter (D) of the targeted refraction. The postoperative mean spherical equivalent was +0.07 D ± 0.23 (SD) and +0.01 ± 0.27 D, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The CDVA, UDVA, and safety outcomes between transepithelial PRK and alcohol-assisted PRK were comparable. Profiles for both techniques applied to regular corneas preserved the eye's natural HOAs. Transepithelial PRK is faster to perform and it is an all-laser procedure, which might be less stressful for the patient. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Mr. Ewering and Mr. Arba-Mosquera are employees of Schwind eye-tech-solutions. Dr. Luger has no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.