We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Comparison of the visual outcomes between PRK-MMC and phakic IOL implantation in high myopic patients.
Eye 2014 September
PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes between PRK-MMC and phakic IOL in patients with more than 8 diopter (D) of myopia.
METHODS: This comparative study was performed on 23 eyes under treatment with Artiflex (group A) and 23 eyes under treatment with PRK-MMC (group B). Artiflex phakic IOL (Ophtec BV) was used in group A, and the VISX STAR S4 Excimer Laser (Abbott) was used for PRK-MMC in group B.
RESULTS: The safety index was 1.11 ± 0.23 and 1.05 ± 0.25 (P = 0.100) and the efficacy index was 1.02 ± 0.11 and 0.98 ± 0.10 (P = 0.266) in group A and B, respectively. At 1 year after surgery, the manifest refraction spherical equivalent was -0.17 ± 1.18 and -0.25 ± 0.18 D in group A and B, respectively (P = 0.471). Mesopic CS showed no significant difference between the two groups in any spatial frequency. Total coma was 0.24 ± 0.17 and 0.67 ± 0.40 μm (P < 0.001), spherical aberration was -0.11 ± 0.11 and 0.41 ± 0.18 μm (P < 0.001), and RMS HOAT was 0.50 ± 0.20 and 0.96 ± 0.45 μm (P<0.001) in group A and B, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Phakic IOL implantation was better than PRK-MMC in the correction of high myopia in terms of visual quality, but the two methods had no difference with regard to visual acuity. Therefore, PRK-MMC can be used when the anterior chamber depth is a limiting factor in the implantation of phakic IOLs.
METHODS: This comparative study was performed on 23 eyes under treatment with Artiflex (group A) and 23 eyes under treatment with PRK-MMC (group B). Artiflex phakic IOL (Ophtec BV) was used in group A, and the VISX STAR S4 Excimer Laser (Abbott) was used for PRK-MMC in group B.
RESULTS: The safety index was 1.11 ± 0.23 and 1.05 ± 0.25 (P = 0.100) and the efficacy index was 1.02 ± 0.11 and 0.98 ± 0.10 (P = 0.266) in group A and B, respectively. At 1 year after surgery, the manifest refraction spherical equivalent was -0.17 ± 1.18 and -0.25 ± 0.18 D in group A and B, respectively (P = 0.471). Mesopic CS showed no significant difference between the two groups in any spatial frequency. Total coma was 0.24 ± 0.17 and 0.67 ± 0.40 μm (P < 0.001), spherical aberration was -0.11 ± 0.11 and 0.41 ± 0.18 μm (P < 0.001), and RMS HOAT was 0.50 ± 0.20 and 0.96 ± 0.45 μm (P<0.001) in group A and B, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Phakic IOL implantation was better than PRK-MMC in the correction of high myopia in terms of visual quality, but the two methods had no difference with regard to visual acuity. Therefore, PRK-MMC can be used when the anterior chamber depth is a limiting factor in the implantation of phakic IOLs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app