Outcomes of Single-Step Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy Compared With Alcohol-Assisted Photorefractive Keratectomy Using Wave-Light EX500 Platform

Purpose To compare the visual outcome of transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) against alcohol-assisted PRK in treating low-to-moderate myopia with or without astigmatism. Setting Dhahran Eye Specialist Hospital, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Design This is a retrospective study. Methods Forty eyes of 22 patients with myopia from -0.75 to -6.00 diopters (D) with or without astigmatism from 0 to -3D were included in this study. Preoperative and postoperative data of 20 eyes from 11 patients who underwent transepithelial PRK were compared with 20 eyes from 11 patients who underwent alcohol-assisted PRK were collected and analyzed. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest spherical equivalence (SE), manifest cylinder, vector analysis of astigmatism, and efficacy and safety indices were compared between the groups at a mean follow-up of one year postoperatively. Results Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except the transepithelial PRK group had lower cylinder values than the alcohol-assisted PRK group by 0.69D. Regression analysis was used to control for the difference in the cylinder in all outcome parameters. Both groups had similar mean UDVA (p=0.73), CDVA (p=0.98), the proportion of eyes in either group achieved (20/20, 20/25, and 20/30) UDVA (p=0.72, 0.68 and 0.31 respectively) and percentage of eyes lost two lines of CDVA (p=1.0). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in regard to both efficacy and safety indices (p=0.55 and 0.67, respectively). Both groups had similar residual SE (p=0.72), the proportion of eyes within ±0.5D of SE (p=0.29), and residual refractive astigmatism (p=0.87). Both groups had similar difference vectors, surgically induced astigmatism, and correction index (p=0.82, 0.10, and 0.26, respectively). However, the transepithelial PRK group had lower target-induced astigmatism (TIA; p=0.01), higher magnitude of error (ME; p=0.05), and higher angle of error (AE; p=0.02) than the alcohol-assisted PRK group. Conclusion Transepithelial PRK had similar visual and refractive outcomes as alcohol-assisted PRK. This approach was considered as safe and effective as alcohol-assisted PRK in treating patients with low-to-moderate myopia with or without astigmatism.