首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Ophthalmology >Comparison between Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy versus Alcohol-Assisted Photorefractive Keratectomy in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism
【24h】

Comparison between Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy versus Alcohol-Assisted Photorefractive Keratectomy in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism

机译:经上皮屈光性角膜切除术与酒精辅助性屈光性角膜切除术矫正近视和近视散光的比较

获取原文
       

摘要

Purpose. The aim of the study was to compare visual acuity, refractive results, safety, and efficacy of TPRK with AAPRK as primary outcomes and surgical time, pain scores, haze levels, and healing time as secondary outcomes in TPRK and AAPRK groups. Setting. Security Forces Hospital, Ophthalmology Department, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Design. Prospective, nonrandomized case-control comparative study. Methods. A total of 200 eyes of 100 consecutive patients were included. One hundred eyes underwent TPRK in the right eye (study group), and 100 eyes underwent AAPRK in the left eye (control group). Ablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER750S. Clinical outcomes during 6 months’ follow-up were compared. Results. The mean age of patients was 28.3 ± 6.3, 77 were females and 23 males. The mean surgical time was 162.17 ±  14.827 s and 243.24  ±  98.69 s, respectively. At day 1, the UDVA mean was 0.7 in 87% of eyes in the TPRK group while it was 0.5 in 45% of eyes in AAPRK; at week 1, it was 0.9 in 88% of eyes in the TPRK group and 0.6 in 60% of eyes in AAPRK. The mean pain scores were less and lower incidence of corneal haze in the TPRK. Complete epithelial healing time was shorter in TPRK, 3.20 ± 0.686 and 4.60 ± 1.969 days, respectively. Conclusions. TPRK and AAPRK produce similar results 6 months postoperatively. However, in the early postoperative period, there were significant differences in UDVA, pain score, level of haze, and complete epithelial healing time. The pain scores were lower, level of haze was less, and healing time was shorter in the TPRK group which provided patient better felling and comfort in this period. Both of procedures are effective and safe for correction of myopia and compound myopic astigmatism. This trial is registered with NCT03569423.
机译:目的。该研究的目的是比较TPRK与AAPRK的视敏度,屈光结果,安全性和疗效,并将其作为主要结局,将手术时间,疼痛评分,雾度和愈合时间作为TPRK和AAPRK组的次要结局。设置。沙特阿拉伯利雅得眼科安全部队医院。设计。前瞻性,非随机病例对照比较研究。方法。包括100例连续患者的200眼。右眼(研究组)接受了一百只眼的TPRK(研究组),左眼(对照组)接受了AAPRK的一百只眼。用Schwind Amaris准分子LASER750S进行消融。比较了6个月的随访结果。结果。患者的平均年龄为28.3±6.3,女性为77岁,男性为2​​3岁。平均手术时间分别为162.17±14.827 s和243.24±98.69 s。在第1天,TPRK组的UDVA平均值为87%的眼睛为0.7,而AAPRK的45%的眼睛为0.5。在第1周,TPRK组的88%的眼睛为0.9,而AAPRK的60%的眼睛为0.6。 TPRK中的平均疼痛评分较低,角膜混浊的发生率较低。 TPRK的完全上皮愈合时间较短,分别为3.20±0.686和4.60±1.969天。结论。 TPRK和AAPRK在术后6个月产生相似的结果。然而,在术后早期,UDVA,疼痛评分,雾度和完全上皮愈合时间存在显着差异。 TPRK组的疼痛评分较低,雾度较低,愈合时间较短,在此期间可为患者提供更好的舒适感。这两种方法对于矫正近视和复合近视散光都是有效且安全的。该试用版已在NCT03569423中注册。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号