Suppr超能文献

中度近视的屈光结果、对比敏感度、高阶像差及患者满意度:波前优化准分子原位角膜磨镶术与节省组织的准分子原位角膜磨镶术对比

Refractive Outcomes, Contrast Sensitivity, HOAs, and Patient Satisfaction in Moderate Myopia: Wavefront-Optimized Versus Tissue-Saving PRK.

作者信息

Nassiri Nader, Sheibani Kourosh, Azimi Abbas, Khosravi Farinaz Mahmoodi, Heravian Javad, Yekta Abasali, Moghaddam Hadi Ostadi, Nassiri Saman, Yasseri Mehdi, Nassiri Nariman

出版信息

J Refract Surg. 2015 Oct;31(10):683-90. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150831-01. Epub 2015 Sep 3.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare refractive outcomes, contrast sensitivity, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), and patient satisfaction after photorefractive keratectomy for correction of moderate myopia with two methods: tissue saving versus wavefront optimized.

METHODS

In this prospective, comparative study, 152 eyes (80 patients) with moderate myopia with and without astigmatism were randomly divided into two groups: the tissue-saving group (Technolas 217z Zyoptix laser; Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY) (76 eyes of 39 patients) or the wavefront-optimized group (WaveLight Allegretto Wave Eye-Q laser; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX) (76 eyes of 41 patients). Preoperative and 3-month postoperative refractive outcomes, contrast sensitivity, HOAs, and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The mean spherical equivalent was -4.50 ± 1.02 diopters. No statistically significant differences were detected between the groups in terms of uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity and spherical equivalent preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. No statistically significant differences were seen in the amount of preoperative to postoperative contrast sensitivity changes between the two groups in photopic and mesopic conditions. HOAs and Q factor increased in both groups postoperatively (P = .001), with the tissue-saving method causing more increases in HOAs (P = .007) and Q factor (P = .039). Patient satisfaction was comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both platforms were effective in correcting moderate myopia with or without astigmatism. No difference in refractive outcome, contrast sensitivity changes, and patient satisfaction between the groups was observed. Postoperatively, the tissue-saving method caused a higher increase in HOAs and Q factor compared to the wavefront-optimized method, which could be due to larger optical zone sizes in the tissue-saving group.

摘要

目的

采用两种方法(组织节省法与波前优化法)对比准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(PRK)矫正中度近视后的屈光效果、对比敏感度、高阶像差(HOA)及患者满意度。

方法

在这项前瞻性对照研究中,152只眼(80例患者)的中度近视伴或不伴散光被随机分为两组:组织节省组(Technolas 217z Zyoptix激光;博士伦公司,纽约州罗切斯特)(39例患者的76只眼)和波前优化组(威视 Allegretto Wave Eye-Q激光;爱尔康实验室公司,得克萨斯州沃思堡)(41例患者的76只眼)。比较两组术前及术后3个月的屈光效果、对比敏感度、HOA及患者满意度。

结果

平均等效球镜度为-4.50±1.02屈光度。两组术前及术后3个月的未矫正和矫正远视力及等效球镜度差异均无统计学意义。两组在明视和 mesopic 条件下,术前至术后对比敏感度变化量差异无统计学意义。两组术后HOA和Q因子均升高(P = 0.001),组织节省法导致HOA(P = 0.007)和Q因子(P = 0.039)升高更多。两组患者满意度相当。

结论

两种平台矫正伴或不伴散光的中度近视均有效。两组在屈光效果、对比敏感度变化及患者满意度方面无差异。术后,与波前优化法相比,组织节省法导致HOA和Q因子升高幅度更大,这可能是由于组织节省组的光学区尺寸更大。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验