| Literature DB >> 23799124 |
Aleksandar Stojanovic1, Shihao Chen, Xiangjun Chen, Filip Stojanovic, Jia Zhang, Ting Zhang, Tor Paaske Utheim.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate one-step topography-guided transepithelial ablation in the treatment of low to moderate myopic astigmatism using a 1KHz excimer laser.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23799124 PMCID: PMC3684575 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066618
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Pre-operative corneal surface with the epithelium (green) (a), is reshaped into a regular aspheric surface of desired curvature (b) and the new surface is transferred below the epithelium (c) in a single non-interrupted ablation.
Figure 2Post-operative uncorrected visual acuity vs. pre-operative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity.
Figure 3Attempted vs. achieved spherical equivalent refractive change at 12 months postoperatively.
Figure 4Change in lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity at 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Figure 5Stability of spherical equivalent.
Error bars indicate standard deviation.
Mean wavefront aberrations 12 months after surgery and pre-operatively (6 mm zone analysis, 96 eyes).
| 12 months post-op | Pre-op | P value | |
| RMS HOA (SD) | 0. 4655 (0.1877) | 0. 3831 (0.1801) | 0.000 |
| S 3+5+7 (SD) | 0.4012 (0.1924) | 0.3238 (0.1639) | 0.000 |
| S 4+6+8 (SD) | 0.2005 (0.1059) | 0.1761 (0.1111) | 0.055 |
RMS: Root Mean Square; HOA: Higher Order Aberration; SD: Standard Deviation; S3+5+7: Odd Order Aberrations; S4+6+8: Even Order Aberrations.
Summarized outcomes of recent studies reporting PRK-outcomes in treatment of myopic astigmatism in virgin eyes.
| Study no. | Technique | Published (y) | Follow-up (m) | Eyes(n) | SI | EI | Predictability | MMC | Haze | Epi. removal | ||||
| ±0.5D | ±1.0D | |||||||||||||
| 1 | WF-guided PRK | 2011 | 12 | 34 | 1.15 | 1.02 | 91% | 97% | / | no | Amoils brush | |||
| 2 | WF-optimize PRK | 2011 | 12 | 303 | 1.05 | 1.05 | 99% | / | abl. dep.≥80 µm | grade ≤1 | 20% ethanol | |||
| 3 | Custom PRK | 2012 | 12 | 40 | 1.23 | 1.15 | 89% | 94% | / | not significant | / | |||
| Standard PRK | 40 | 1.19 | 1.06 | 86% | 97% | / | not significant | / | ||||||
| 4 | Standard PRK | 2012 | 12 | 298 | 1.29 | 0.67 | 83% | 100% | / | not significant | Amoils brush | |||
| Transepithelial PRK | ||||||||||||||
| 5 | Standard T-PRK | 2007 | 8.9 | 37 | low to moderate myopia | / | 0.93 | 95% | / | / | not significant | PTK | ||
| 22 | high myopia | / | 0.84 | 95% | / | / | not significant | PTK | ||||||
| 6 | Standard T-PRK | 2009 | 3 | 15 | 1.17 | / | / | / | / | grade <2 | PTK | |||
| 7 | T-PRK | 2011 | 3 | 50 | 1.00 | 0.98 | / | / | / | 10% grade 1 | Integrated PTK | |||
| 8 | Topo-guided T-PRK | 12 | 117 | 1.27 | 1.09 | 94% | 100% | abl. dep.≥100 µm | 11% grade 0.5 | Integrated PTK | ||||
WF: Wavefront; T-PRK: Transepithelial PRK; SI: Safety Index = preoperative CDVA/postoperative CDVA; EI: Efficacy Index = postoperative UDVA/preoperative CDVA; MMC: Mitomycin C.