Suppr超能文献

飞秒激光辅助准分子原位角膜磨镶术与准分子激光角膜表面切削术治疗不同散光程度的两年结果

Two-year results of femtosecond assisted LASIK versus PRK for different severity of astigmatism.

作者信息

Miraftab Mohammad, Hashemi Hassan, Asgari Soheila

机构信息

Noor Ophthalmology Research Center, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.

Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Curr Ophthalmol. 2017 Oct 9;30(1):48-53. doi: 10.1016/j.joco.2017.09.003. eCollection 2018 Mar.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare two-year results of femtosecond laser assisted LASIK (femto-LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in terms of astigmatism correction in patients with less than 2.0 diopters (D) of spherical error and more than 2.0 D of cylinder error.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, data were extracted from 100 patient charts. The two study groups were matched by age, gender, and baseline uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and refractive astigmatism (RA). Preoperative astigmatism was categorized as mild: 2.00 to <3.00 D, moderate: 3.00 to <4.00 D, and severe: ≥4.00 D.

RESULTS

Mean RA in the femto-LASIK and PRK groups was respectively -3.15 ± 0.94 D (-7.00 to -2.00 D) and -3.29 ± 0.95 D (-6.25 to -2.00 D) at baseline ( = 0.284), and -0.61 ± 0.40 D and -0.62 ± 0.60 D one year after surgery ( = 0.674), but significantly lower in the femto-LASIK group (-0.61 ± 0.39 vs. -0.83 ± 0.56 D,  = 0.021) at 2 years when the rate of residual astigmatism more than 1.0 D was 6.3% in the femto-LASIK and 19.6% in the PRK group ( = 0.046). Mean UDVA in the femto-LASIK group (0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR) was better than the PRK group (0.06 ± 0.10 logMAR) ( = 0.025). Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was not significantly different between groups (0.01 ± 0.03 vs. 0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR,  = 0.714). Both groups had 1-4 Snellen lines CDVA improvement. The three subgroups of baseline astigmatism did not differ significantly in terms of residual astigmatism (all  > 0.05). However, in subgroups with ≥4.00 D cylinder, there was less astigmatic regression at 1 year in the femto-LASIK group (0.28 ± 0.43 D) than the PRK group (0.54 ± 0.68 D) ( = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results pointed to better two-year results with femto-LASIK in the treatment of different degrees of astigmatism. UDVA improvement was superior with femto-LASIK, but the two methods did not significantly differ in terms of CDVA improvement.

摘要

目的

比较飞秒激光制瓣准分子原位角膜磨镶术(femto-LASIK)和准分子激光角膜切削术(PRK)在矫正球镜度数小于2.00屈光度(D)、柱镜度数大于2.00 D的患者散光方面的两年疗效。

方法

在这项回顾性研究中,从100例患者病历中提取数据。两个研究组在年龄、性别、术前未矫正远视力(UDVA)和屈光性散光(RA)方面进行匹配。术前散光分为轻度:2.00至<3.00 D,中度:3.00至<4.00 D,重度:≥4.00 D。

结果

femto-LASIK组和PRK组的平均RA在基线时分别为-3.15±0.94 D(-7.00至-2.00 D)和-3.29±0.95 D(-6.25至-2.00 D)(P = 0.284),术后1年分别为-0.61±0.40 D和-0.62±0.60 D(P = 0.674),但在术后2年时,femto-LASIK组显著更低(-0.61±0.39 vs. -0.83±0.56 D,P = 0.021),此时femto-LASIK组残余散光超过1.0 D的比例为6.3%,PRK组为19.6%(P = 0.046)。femto-LASIK组的平均UDVA(0.02±0.05 logMAR)优于PRK组(0.06±0.10 logMAR)(P = 0.025)。两组间平均矫正远视力(CDVA)无显著差异(0.01±0.03 vs. 0.01±0.04 logMAR,P = 0.714)。两组的CDVA均提高了1 - 4行。基线散光的三个亚组在残余散光方面无显著差异(均P>0.05)。然而,在柱镜度数≥4.00 D的亚组中。femto-LASIK组术后1年的散光回退(0.28±0.43 D)少于PRK组(0.54±0.68 D)(P = 0.007)。

结论

我们的结果表明,femto-LASIK在治疗不同程度散光方面的两年疗效更好。femto-LASIK在改善UDVA方面更优,但两种方法在改善CDVA方面无显著差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2722/5859517/f22ce4e2f72f/gr1.jpg

相似文献

1
Two-year results of femtosecond assisted LASIK versus PRK for different severity of astigmatism.
J Curr Ophthalmol. 2017 Oct 9;30(1):48-53. doi: 10.1016/j.joco.2017.09.003. eCollection 2018 Mar.
2
Femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK versus PRK for high myopia: comparison of 18-month visual acuity and quality.
Int Ophthalmol. 2017 Aug;37(4):995-1001. doi: 10.1007/s10792-016-0364-7. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
3
Femtosecond-Assisted LASIK Versus PRK: Comparison of 6-Month Visual Acuity and Quality Outcome for High Myopia.
Eye Contact Lens. 2016 Nov;42(6):354-357. doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000216.

引用本文的文献

2
Vector analysis of astigmatism correction after PRK, FS-LASIK, and SMILE for myopic astigmatism.
Int Ophthalmol. 2023 Nov;43(11):3999-4009. doi: 10.1007/s10792-023-02804-0. Epub 2023 Jul 5.

本文引用的文献

2
Clinical outcomes of wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis to treat moderate-to-high astigmatism.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2015 Jul 13;9:1291-8. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S87887. eCollection 2015.
3
Prevalence of refractive error in Europe: the European Eye Epidemiology (E(3)) Consortium.
Eur J Epidemiol. 2015 Apr;30(4):305-15. doi: 10.1007/s10654-015-0010-0. Epub 2015 Mar 18.
4
Astigmatism among myopics and its changes from childhood to adult age: a 23-year follow-up study.
Acta Ophthalmol. 2015 May;93(3):276-83. doi: 10.1111/aos.12572. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
5
LASIK versus photorefractive keratectomy for high myopic (> 3 diopter) astigmatism.
J Refract Surg. 2013 Dec;29(12):824-31. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20131029-03. Epub 2013 Nov 5.
6
Astigmatism induced by conventional spherical ablation after PRK and LASIK in myopia with astigmatism < 1.00 D.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:2109-17. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S37489. Epub 2012 Dec 20.
7
Time course of refractive and corneal astigmatism after laser in situ keratomileusis for moderate to high astigmatism.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012 Aug;38(8):1408-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.03.030.
9
Astigmatism correction: Laser in situ keratomileusis versus posterior chamber collagen copolymer toric phakic intraocular lens implantation.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012 Apr;38(4):574-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.10.034. Epub 2012 Feb 10.

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