We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, P.H.S.
Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy after radial keratotomy.
Journal of Refractive Surgery 1995 May
BACKGROUND: Correction of residual myopia after radial keratotomy may be attempted with repeated keratotomy surgery, but predictability can be less than satisfactory. Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) provides an alternative approach to improving the refractive result in these patients.
METHODS: Twenty-five eyes of 20 patients at five clinical locations underwent PRK for residual myopia after radial keratotomy. The number of incisions ranged from 4 to more than 16. Clear zones ranged from 3 mm to 4 mm. Best corrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 16 of the 25 eyes, with a range from 20/12 to 20/80. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/200 or worse in 15 of the 25 eyes, with a range from 20/25 to finger counting. The interval between radial keratotomy and PRK averaged 33.5 months, with a range from 5 to 96 months. Nineteen eyes had 6 months or more of follow up; 15 had 12 months or more.
RESULTS: Corneal haze was maximal 1 month after surgery (mean +/- SE, 0.65 +/- 0.09), and declined to 0.35 +/- 0.16 at 12 months. Twelve months after PRK, mean keratometric readings were 40.19 +/- 0.81 diopters (D) and mean spherical equivalent refraction was -1.42 +/- 0.47 D. Nine (60%) of the 15 eyes with 12 months follow up were within 1 D of emmetropia and 12 (80%) were within 2 D. Eight (53%) of the 15 eyes had uncorrected visual acuities of 20/40 or better. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity in the eyes with 12 months follow up improved in 4, did not change in 4, and worsened in 6.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of PRK are less predictable in eyes that have previously undergone radial keratotomy, and these eyes respond with more haze after PRK than normal eyes.
METHODS: Twenty-five eyes of 20 patients at five clinical locations underwent PRK for residual myopia after radial keratotomy. The number of incisions ranged from 4 to more than 16. Clear zones ranged from 3 mm to 4 mm. Best corrected visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 16 of the 25 eyes, with a range from 20/12 to 20/80. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/200 or worse in 15 of the 25 eyes, with a range from 20/25 to finger counting. The interval between radial keratotomy and PRK averaged 33.5 months, with a range from 5 to 96 months. Nineteen eyes had 6 months or more of follow up; 15 had 12 months or more.
RESULTS: Corneal haze was maximal 1 month after surgery (mean +/- SE, 0.65 +/- 0.09), and declined to 0.35 +/- 0.16 at 12 months. Twelve months after PRK, mean keratometric readings were 40.19 +/- 0.81 diopters (D) and mean spherical equivalent refraction was -1.42 +/- 0.47 D. Nine (60%) of the 15 eyes with 12 months follow up were within 1 D of emmetropia and 12 (80%) were within 2 D. Eight (53%) of the 15 eyes had uncorrected visual acuities of 20/40 or better. Spectacle-corrected visual acuity in the eyes with 12 months follow up improved in 4, did not change in 4, and worsened in 6.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of PRK are less predictable in eyes that have previously undergone radial keratotomy, and these eyes respond with more haze after PRK than normal eyes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
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