Cargando…

Plasma rich in growth factors versus Mitomycin C in photorefractive keratectomy

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) in photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus Mitomycin C (MMC). This is a comparative, longitudinal and retrospective case-control study (MMC vs PRGF), in patients with a spherical correction from −0.25 to −8.00 D and cylinde...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sanchez-Avila, Ronald M., Uribe-Badillo, Edmar E., Sanz, Javier Fernández-Vega, Muruzabal, Francisco, Jurado, Nancy, Alfonso-Bartolozzi, Belén, Alfonso, Jose F., Baamonde, Begoña, Anitua, Eduardo, Merayo-Lloves, Jesus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7837908/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33546027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000024139
Descripción
Sumario:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) in photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus Mitomycin C (MMC). This is a comparative, longitudinal and retrospective case-control study (MMC vs PRGF), in patients with a spherical correction from −0.25 to −8.00 D and cylinder correction from −0.25 to −3.00. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), refractive efficacy and safety indices, and changes in endothelial cell density were evaluated. The predictability was assessed with the postoperative manifest spherical equivalent. Forty-four patients (72 eyes) were treated with MMC and twenty-five patients (45 eyes) with PRGF. The final UDVA (LogMar) in MMC was 0.029 ± 0.065 and in PRGF it was 0.028 ± 0.048 (p = 0.383). The efficacy index for MMC was 0.98 ± 0.10 and 1.10 ± 0.46 for patients treated with PRGF (p = 0.062). The safety index for MMC was 1.03 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.46 (p = 0.158) for PRGF group. The change percentage of endothelial cell density was 0.9 ± 11.6 for MMC and 4.3 ± 13.1 for PRGF (p = 0.593). The predictability for MMC was 92.1% and for the PRGF was 91.9% (p = 0.976). Hyperemia, eye pain and superficial keratitis were observed in 11.1% of the MMC group; no adverse events were observed with the PRGF. The use of PRGF in PRK surgery is as effective as MMC. The PRGF shows a better safety profile than MMC for its intraoperative use in PRK.