Prospective randomized comparison of wavefront-guided and conventional photorefractive keratectomy for myopia with the Meditec MEL 70 laser
Journal of Refractive Surgery, ISSN: 1081-597X, Vol: 20, Issue: 5, Page: 422-431
2004
- 49Citations
- 32Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations49
- Citation Indexes48
- 48
- CrossRef40
- Policy Citations1
- 1
- Captures32
- Readers32
- 32
Article Description
PURPOSE: To study refractive results and aberrometric changes in myopic patients treated with wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in comparison with standard PRK. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 60 patients with myopic astigmatism were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 included 30 eyes (mean spherical equivalent refraction -4.39 ± 1.31 D; range -2.50 to -6.50 D) treated with wavefront-guided PRK using the WASCA workstation and the Asclepion Meditec flying spot MEL 70 excimer laser. Group 2 had 30 eyes (mean spherical equivalent refraction -4.33 ± 1.22 D; range-2.50 to -6.50 D) that underwent conventional PRK using the same laser, and served as the control group. Wavefront analysis of high order aberrations was performed before and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: Postoperatively, wavefront error increased in both groups (5.0-mm wavefront aperture diameter). Six months after surgery, the eyes that received the WASCA ablation had a smaller increase in root-mean-square (RMS; 70% of increment) compared to the conventional PRK group (139% of increment) (P<.001.) In the standard PRK group, all aberrations notably increased; in the wavefront-guided PRK group there was a smaller increase of trefoil and spherical aberrations (P<.001) and a decrease of coma aberrations (P<.001). The smaller increase of wavefront error in the wavefront-guided PRK group compared to the standard PRK group was more evident when preoperative RMS values were higher than 0.4 μm (P<.01). The visual parameters (spherical equivalent refraction, uncorrected and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity) did not show significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Wavefront-guided PRK induced a smaller increase of postoperative wavefront-error compared to conventional PRK, particularly in patients with higher preoperative higher order aberrations.
Bibliographic Details
SLACK, Inc.
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know