Comparative study between photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and butterfly laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (BLASEK) / Estudo comparativo entre a ceratectomia fotorrefrativa (PRK) e a ceratectomia subepitelial borboleta assistida a laser (LASEK borboleta)

AUTOR(ES)
DATA DE PUBLICAÇÃO

2007

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Comparatively evaluate the results of two techniques of surface excimer laser refractive surgery, photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and butterfly laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (BLASEK). SETTING: Sadalla Amin Ghanem Eye Hospital, Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized and double-masked study including 102 eyes from 51 patients. Each patient was randomized to have one eye operated on with PRK and the other with BLASEK. Patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding uncorrected distant visual acuity (VA) (p= 0.5593). On the 12th post-operative (PO) month, 98.04% of the eyes in the PRK group and 96.08% in the BLASEK group reached uncorrected VA of 20/20. The predictability, efficacy, safety and stability did not present statically significant difference between groups. The safety index was of 1 for PRK and 0.996 for BLASEK. One eye of the BLASEK group lost one line on the 12th PO month. The percentage of the eyes that presented spherical equivalent at 12 months in the range of ±0.50 D was 94.1% in the PRK group and 86.3% in the BLASEK group (p = 0.1883). While in the range of ±1.0 D it was 100% in the PRK group and 98% in the BLASEK group (p = 0.3125). There were no retreatments. The mean surgical time was 304.86 + 58.77 seconds (approximately 5 minutes) in PRK and 608.35 + 76.88 seconds in BLASEK (approximately 10 minutes) (P <0,001). The mean reepithelization time in the PRK group was 4.35 ± 0.48 days (range, 4 to 5 days), and in the BLASEK group was 4.75 ± 0.72 days (range, 4 to 6 days) (P <0.002). Pain scores and ocular discomfort were not statistically different between groups, although there was a trend towards a lower pain level with PRK (3.31 ± 4.09 vs. 4.43 ± 4.27; P = 0.18). Schirmer test values were significantly reduced from preoperative levels through 12 months with both PRK (23.6 ± 8.1 vs. 19.4 ± 10.1; P <0.002) and BLASEK (22.4 ± 8.7 vs. 18.9 ± 9.7; P = 0.01), however there was no difference between groups in any time point. Haze incidence was slight in both groups. Only in the 1st PO month statistical difference between the groups was observed, with higher intensity in the BLASEK group (0.18 ± 0.3881) when compared to the PRK (0.08 ± 0.2109) (p = 0.039936). The highest intensity was observed on the 3rd month, with gradual reduction until the 12th month. CONCLUSION: In the conditions of this study, it can be concluded that PRK and BLASEK showed similar results, except that PRK presented shorter surgical time, faster corneal reepithelization and less haze at 30th PO days.

ASSUNTO(S)

ceratectomia subepitelial assistida por laser astigmatismo double-blind method miopia astigmatism prospective studies laser assisted subepithelial keratectomy myopia excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy ceractectomia fotorrefrativa por excimer laser estudos prospectivos método duplo-cego

ACESSO AO ARTIGO

Documentos Relacionados