Next Article in Journal
Describing High-Order Harmonic Generation Using Quantum Optical Models
Next Article in Special Issue
Visual Adaptation to Scattering in Myopes
Previous Article in Journal
Thermal Noise in Cubic Optical Cavities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Determination of Optic Axes by Corneal Topography among Italian, Brazilian, and Chinese Populations
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparison of Refractive and Visual Outcomes after Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy (TransPRK) in Low versus Moderate Myopia

by
Diego de Ortueta
1,*,
Dennis von Rüden
1 and
Samuel Arba-Mosquera
2
1
AURELIOS Augenzentrum Recklinghausen, 45657 Recklinghausen, Germany
2
SCHWIND Eye-Tech-Solutions, 63801 Kleinostheim, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Photonics 2021, 8(7), 262; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics8070262
Submission received: 21 April 2021 / Revised: 24 June 2021 / Accepted: 1 July 2021 / Published: 6 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Optics and Ophthalmology)

Abstract

Is it possible to obtain good results in myopia of 2 or fewer diopters (D) with transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TransPRK) changing the optical zone and epithelium thickness? We retrospectively analyzed two groups of 296 eyes with a minimum follow-up of 4 months. Group A had 2 or less D, treated with an optical zone (OZ) 0.2 mm bigger than recommended, and a central epithelium thickness of 60 microns, and group B had 2 D to 5 D, with the recommended optical zone, and a 55-micron epithelium ablation at the center. The outcomes were not different between the two myopic ranges; the postop uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 ± 4 in both groups (p = 0.2), which was −0.3 ± 0.8 lines worse than the preoperative corrected distance visual acuity in both groups (p = 0.5). The safety of the treatments resulted in a change of 0.0 ± 0.7 lines in the low myopia group, versus a gain of +0.1 ± 0.8 lines in the moderate myopia group (p = 0.1). The deviation from the intended target was −0.04 ± 0.33 D in the low myopia group and +0.07 ± 0.32 D in the moderate myopia group (p < 0.0001); the postoperative spherical equivalent was 0.00 ± 0.33 D in the low myopia group and +0.10 ± 0.31 D in the moderate myopia group (p < 0.0001). The postop refractive astigmatism was 0.32 ± 0.16 D in both groups (p = 0.5). In conclusion, the refractive and visual outcomes after TransPRK are comparable in low myopia changing the optical zone and epithelium thickness versus moderate myopia with standard optical zone and epithelium thickness.
Keywords: transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy; TransPRK; myopia; astigmatism; epithelium; smart pulse; smart surface; AMARIS; PRK transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy; TransPRK; myopia; astigmatism; epithelium; smart pulse; smart surface; AMARIS; PRK

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

de Ortueta, D.; von Rüden, D.; Arba-Mosquera, S. Comparison of Refractive and Visual Outcomes after Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy (TransPRK) in Low versus Moderate Myopia. Photonics 2021, 8, 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics8070262

AMA Style

de Ortueta D, von Rüden D, Arba-Mosquera S. Comparison of Refractive and Visual Outcomes after Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy (TransPRK) in Low versus Moderate Myopia. Photonics. 2021; 8(7):262. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics8070262

Chicago/Turabian Style

de Ortueta, Diego, Dennis von Rüden, and Samuel Arba-Mosquera. 2021. "Comparison of Refractive and Visual Outcomes after Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy (TransPRK) in Low versus Moderate Myopia" Photonics 8, no. 7: 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics8070262

APA Style

de Ortueta, D., von Rüden, D., & Arba-Mosquera, S. (2021). Comparison of Refractive and Visual Outcomes after Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy (TransPRK) in Low versus Moderate Myopia. Photonics, 8(7), 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics8070262

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop