Cargando…

Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, predictability, safety, and induced higher-order aberrations (HOAs) between wavefront-guided and non-wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMED, and EMBASE were searched for randomized cont...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kobashi, Hidenaga, Kamiya, Kazutaka, Hoshi, Keika, Igarashi, Akihito, Shimizu, Kimiya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4114780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25072409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103605
_version_ 1782328485559140352
author Kobashi, Hidenaga
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hoshi, Keika
Igarashi, Akihito
Shimizu, Kimiya
author_facet Kobashi, Hidenaga
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hoshi, Keika
Igarashi, Akihito
Shimizu, Kimiya
author_sort Kobashi, Hidenaga
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, predictability, safety, and induced higher-order aberrations (HOAs) between wavefront-guided and non-wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMED, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials. Trials meeting the selection criteria were quality appraised, and data was extracted by 2 independent authors. Measures of association were pooled quantitatively using meta-analytical methods. Comparisons between wavefront-guided and non-wavefront-guided ablations were made as pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences. The pooled ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for efficacy, safety, and predictability. The weighted mean differences and 95% CIs were used to compare induced HOAs. RESULTS: The study covered five trials involving 298 eyes. After wavefront-guided PRK, the pooled OR of achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 (efficacy) was 1.18 (95% CI, 0.53–2.60; p = 0.69), the pooled OR of achieving a result within ±0.50 diopter of the intended target (predictability) was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.40–1.84; p = 0.70). No study reported a loss of 2 or more lines of Snellen acuity (safety) with either modality. In eyes with wavefront-guided PRK, the postoperative trefoil aberrations (mean difference −0.02; 95% CI, −0.03 to −0.00; p = 0.03) were significantly lower. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the postoperative total HOAs (mean difference −0.04; 95% CI, −0.23 to 0.14; p = 0.63), spherical (mean difference 0.00; 95% CI, −0.08 to 0.09; p = 0.93), and coma (mean difference −0.06; 95% CI, −0.14 to 0.03; p = 0.20) aberrations. CONCLUSIONS: According to the meta-analysis, wavefront-guided PRK offered no advantage in efficacy, predictability, or safety measures over non-wavefront-guided PRK, although it may have induced fewer trefoil aberrations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4114780
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41147802014-08-04 Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Kobashi, Hidenaga Kamiya, Kazutaka Hoshi, Keika Igarashi, Akihito Shimizu, Kimiya PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, predictability, safety, and induced higher-order aberrations (HOAs) between wavefront-guided and non-wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMED, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials. Trials meeting the selection criteria were quality appraised, and data was extracted by 2 independent authors. Measures of association were pooled quantitatively using meta-analytical methods. Comparisons between wavefront-guided and non-wavefront-guided ablations were made as pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences. The pooled ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for efficacy, safety, and predictability. The weighted mean differences and 95% CIs were used to compare induced HOAs. RESULTS: The study covered five trials involving 298 eyes. After wavefront-guided PRK, the pooled OR of achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 (efficacy) was 1.18 (95% CI, 0.53–2.60; p = 0.69), the pooled OR of achieving a result within ±0.50 diopter of the intended target (predictability) was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.40–1.84; p = 0.70). No study reported a loss of 2 or more lines of Snellen acuity (safety) with either modality. In eyes with wavefront-guided PRK, the postoperative trefoil aberrations (mean difference −0.02; 95% CI, −0.03 to −0.00; p = 0.03) were significantly lower. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the postoperative total HOAs (mean difference −0.04; 95% CI, −0.23 to 0.14; p = 0.63), spherical (mean difference 0.00; 95% CI, −0.08 to 0.09; p = 0.93), and coma (mean difference −0.06; 95% CI, −0.14 to 0.03; p = 0.20) aberrations. CONCLUSIONS: According to the meta-analysis, wavefront-guided PRK offered no advantage in efficacy, predictability, or safety measures over non-wavefront-guided PRK, although it may have induced fewer trefoil aberrations. Public Library of Science 2014-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4114780/ /pubmed/25072409 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103605 Text en © 2014 Kobashi et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kobashi, Hidenaga
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Hoshi, Keika
Igarashi, Akihito
Shimizu, Kimiya
Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Wavefront-Guided versus Non-Wavefront-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy for Myopia: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort wavefront-guided versus non-wavefront-guided photorefractive keratectomy for myopia: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4114780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25072409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103605
work_keys_str_mv AT kobashihidenaga wavefrontguidedversusnonwavefrontguidedphotorefractivekeratectomyformyopiametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT kamiyakazutaka wavefrontguidedversusnonwavefrontguidedphotorefractivekeratectomyformyopiametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT hoshikeika wavefrontguidedversusnonwavefrontguidedphotorefractivekeratectomyformyopiametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT igarashiakihito wavefrontguidedversusnonwavefrontguidedphotorefractivekeratectomyformyopiametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT shimizukimiya wavefrontguidedversusnonwavefrontguidedphotorefractivekeratectomyformyopiametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials