This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2012.02862.x
Efficacy and safety of cross-cylinder photorefractive keratectomy versus single method in medium-high astigmatism: a randomized clinical trial
© 2012 The Author. Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology © 2012 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology
- Accepted manuscript online: 7 SEP 2012 06:47AM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 7 JUL 2012
- Manuscript Received: 4 NOV 2011
- Cited By
- photorefractive keratectomy;
To compare efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) by cross-cylinder with single methods in medium-high astigmatism.
Randomized clinical trial study
Fifty patients with medium-high compound myopic astigmatism were enrolled between September 2007 and September 2008.
PRK was performed on 100 eyes of 50 patients with compound myopic astigmatism. Each patient underwent PRK by cross-cylinder approach in one eye and single method on the contralateral eye. Vector analysis was used to assess astigmatic results.
Main Outcome Measures
Improvement of visual acuity (snelen chart), refraction, aberrometry.
Uncorrected visual acuity (UCCA) equal to 20/40 or better after six months, was achieved in 98% of eyes in the cross-cylinder method versus 96% in single method.. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent(SE) was -5.2 ±2.1 D in the cross-cylinder method versus -5.1 ±0.5 D in the single method. At six months, the mean SE was – 0.5±0.4 D and -0.6±0.3 D, respectively. Mean IOS was 0.4±0.3 in the cross-cylinder group and 0.4±0.4 in the single group. Mean postoperative absolute change in total root-mean-square higher order aberrations in the cross-cylinder group and single group were 0.16 pm and 0.17 pm, respectively. Any of the mentioned differences didn't appear to be statistically significant.
Both PRK methods appeared to be safe and effective in correcting medium-high astigmatism.