Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (1)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = repeat PRK

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
9 pages, 2631 KB  
Article
Repeat Versus Primary Photorefractive Keratectomy for Treatment of Myopia
by Michael Mimouni, Arie Y. Nemet, Dror Ben Ephraim Noyman, Gilad Rabina, Avia Yossefi and Igor Kaiserman
Optics 2024, 5(4), 477-485; https://doi.org/10.3390/opt5040036 - 19 Nov 2024
Viewed by 2055
Abstract
Although effective, a portion of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) patients will suffer residual myopia or relapse to myopic regression. This retrospective, non-randomized, comparative study, aimed to compare the efficacy of primary PRK versus PRK performed as retreatment after previous surgery for myopia. Data regarding [...] Read more.
Although effective, a portion of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) patients will suffer residual myopia or relapse to myopic regression. This retrospective, non-randomized, comparative study, aimed to compare the efficacy of primary PRK versus PRK performed as retreatment after previous surgery for myopia. Data regarding the right eye of 220 consecutive myopic patients undergoing repeat or primary PRK in 2013–2017 were extracted. Groups were matched for demographics and preoperative spherical equivalent, sphere, astigmatism, uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA). Primary outcomes were an efficacy index (ratio between the postoperative UDVA and the preoperative CDVA), a safety index (ratio between the postoperative and the preoperative CDVA), postoperative UDVA and CDVA, and deviation from target refraction. Primary PRK showed significant superiority in logMAR UDVA (0.01 ± 0.05 versus 0.05 ± 0.10, p = 0.001), logMAR CDVA (0.01 ± 0.05 versus 0.04 ± 0.08, p = 0.01), efficacy index (1.00 ± 0.05 versus 0.97 ± 0.09, p = 0.003) and safety index (1.00 ± 0.06 versus 0.98 ± 0.08, p = 0.04) compared to repeat PRK, but had a significantly higher share of patients with postoperative spherical equivalent (74.5% versus 67.3%) and cylinder (74.5% versus 68.2%) in the range of ±0.5 D. To conclude, enhancement PRK leads to inferior efficacy and safety with greater deviation from target refraction. Adjusted nomograms for repeat PRK may be warranted. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop