RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare two-year results of femtosecond laser assisted LASIK (femto-LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in terms of astigmatism correction in patients with less than 2.0 diopters (D) of spherical error and more than 2.0 D of cylinder error. METHODS: In this retrospective study, data were extracted from 100 patient charts. The two study groups were matched by age, gender, and baseline uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and refractive astigmatism (RA). Preoperative astigmatism was categorized as mild: 2.00 to <3.00 D, moderate: 3.00 to <4.00 D, and severe: ≥4.00 D. RESULTS: Mean RA in the femto-LASIK and PRK groups was respectively -3.15 ± 0.94 D (-7.00 to -2.00 D) and -3.29 ± 0.95 D (-6.25 to -2.00 D) at baseline (P = 0.284), and -0.61 ± 0.40 D and -0.62 ± 0.60 D one year after surgery (P = 0.674), but significantly lower in the femto-LASIK group (-0.61 ± 0.39 vs. -0.83 ± 0.56 D, P = 0.021) at 2 years when the rate of residual astigmatism more than 1.0 D was 6.3% in the femto-LASIK and 19.6% in the PRK group (P = 0.046). Mean UDVA in the femto-LASIK group (0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR) was better than the PRK group (0.06 ± 0.10 logMAR) (P = 0.025). Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was not significantly different between groups (0.01 ± 0.03 vs. 0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR, P = 0.714). Both groups had 1-4 Snellen lines CDVA improvement. The three subgroups of baseline astigmatism did not differ significantly in terms of residual astigmatism (all P > 0.05). However, in subgroups with ≥4.00 D cylinder, there was less astigmatic regression at 1 year in the femto-LASIK group (0.28 ± 0.43 D) than the PRK group (0.54 ± 0.68 D) (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our results pointed to better two-year results with femto-LASIK in the treatment of different degrees of astigmatism. UDVA improvement was superior with femto-LASIK, but the two methods did not significantly differ in terms of CDVA improvement.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare 18-month outcomes between femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK (femto-LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy with mitomycin-C (PRK-MMC) for myopia of more than 7.0 D in terms of visual acuity and quality. METHODS: In this comparative nonrandomized clinical trial, 60 eyes from 30 patients (30 eyes in each group) were enrolled. The two procedures were compared in terms of 18-month changes in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction spherical equivalent, ocular and corneal higher order aberrations (HOAs), and contrast sensitivity (CS). RESULTS: Mean myopia was -8.65 ± 1.51 and -8.04 ± 1.70 D (P = 0.149) and mean ablation depth was 109.37 ± 9.07 and 105.09 ± 12.59 µm (P = 0.138), in the femto-LASIK and PRK-MMC groups, respectively. Baseline parameters were not significantly different between the two groups (all P > 0.05). At 18 months postoperatively, 75 % in the femto-LASIK, versus 57.1 % in the PRK-MMC group, had 20/20 UDVA (P = 0.017). CDVA remained similarly unchanged in both groups (P = 0.616). No case had residual refractive error more than 1.0 D in the femto-LASIK group, while 33.5 % in the other group had more than 1.0 D residual error (P = 0.390). Changes in corneal HOA were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.260). Cases in the femto-LASIK group showed more increase in ocular HOA (P = 0.032) and coma (P = 0.083, power = 72 %). CS remained similarly unchanged in all spatial frequencies in both groups (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although femto-LASIK induces more HOA compared to PRK-MMC, considering outcomes in terms of 20/20 UDVA, residual refractive error, and CS stability, femto-LASIK provides more favorable results than PRK-MMC in high myopia.
