Chunyu Tian1, Xiujun Peng2, Zhengjun Fan2, Zhengqin Yin3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China. Department of Ophthalmology, Navy General Hospital, Beijing 100037, China. Email: piscestcy@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Navy General Hospital, Beijing 100037, China. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of literature was performed to compare various visual function parameters including the final visual acuity outcome and/or adverse events between corneal refractive surgery (CLRS) and phakic intraocular lens implantation (p-IOLi) in the treatment of refractive amblyopic children. DATA SOURCES: Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Controlled Trials Register databases for publications from 1991 to 2013. STUDY SELECTION: There were 25 articles, including 597 patients and 682 eyes, was included in CLRS group. Among them, 21 articles reported the use of CLRS in the treatment of myopic anisometropia for 318 patients (13 photorefractive keratectomy or laser epithelial keratomileusis and eight laser in situ keratomileusis). And 11 articles had the results of CLRS in treating hyperopic anisometropic amblyopia children. Eleven articles reported the effect of p-IOLi for treating high myopia or anisometropic amblyopia, including 61 patients (75 eyes). Age, pre- and postoperation best-corrected vision acuity (BCVA), and spherical equivalent (SE) were compared in CLRS and p-IOLi groups. RESULTS: The average age of CLRS group and p-IOLi group has no statistically significant difference. The SE in CLRS group for myopic anisometropia amblyopia patients was (-10.13 ± 2.73) diopters (D) and for hyperopic anisometropia amblyopia patients was (5.58 ± 1.28) D. In p-IOLi group the SE was (-14.01 ± 1.93) D. BCVA was improved significantly in both groups, and even better in p-IOLi group. Refractive errors were corrected in both groups, but there was no clinically significant difference in final SE between each group. More than one-half of the children had improved binocular fusion and stereopsis function in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both CLRS group and p-IOLi group showed their advantage in treating refractive amblyopia in children. In comparing p-IOLi with CLRS for treatment of refractive amblyopia, no statistically significant difference in final BCVA was observed.
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of literature was performed to compare various visual function parameters including the final visual acuity outcome and/or adverse events between corneal refractive surgery (CLRS) and phakic intraocular lens implantation (p-IOLi) in the treatment of refractive amblyopic children. DATA SOURCES: Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Controlled Trials Register databases for publications from 1991 to 2013. STUDY SELECTION: There were 25 articles, including 597 patients and 682 eyes, was included in CLRS group. Among them, 21 articles reported the use of CLRS in the treatment of myopic anisometropia for 318 patients (13 photorefractive keratectomy or laser epithelial keratomileusis and eight laser in situ keratomileusis). And 11 articles had the results of CLRS in treating hyperopic anisometropic amblyopiachildren. Eleven articles reported the effect of p-IOLi for treating high myopia or anisometropic amblyopia, including 61 patients (75 eyes). Age, pre- and postoperation best-corrected vision acuity (BCVA), and spherical equivalent (SE) were compared in CLRS and p-IOLi groups. RESULTS: The average age of CLRS group and p-IOLi group has no statistically significant difference. The SE in CLRS group for myopic anisometropia amblyopiapatients was (-10.13 ± 2.73) diopters (D) and for hyperopic anisometropia amblyopiapatients was (5.58 ± 1.28) D. In p-IOLi group the SE was (-14.01 ± 1.93) D. BCVA was improved significantly in both groups, and even better in p-IOLi group. Refractive errors were corrected in both groups, but there was no clinically significant difference in final SE between each group. More than one-half of the children had improved binocular fusion and stereopsis function in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both CLRS group and p-IOLi group showed their advantage in treating refractive amblyopia in children. In comparing p-IOLi with CLRS for treatment of refractive amblyopia, no statistically significant difference in final BCVA was observed.