Cargando…

PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) has been well documented, but outcomes of PRK enhancement following PRK remain understudied. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and predictability of PRK enhancement in patients with residual refractive error...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moshirfar, Majid, Villarreal, Alex, Thomson, Andrew C., West, William B., McCabe, Shannon E., Quinonez Zanabria, Eduardo, Graham, Derrick B., Ronquillo, Yasmyne C., Hoopes, Phillip C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7886917/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33515419
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-021-00331-8
_version_ 1783651901092397056
author Moshirfar, Majid
Villarreal, Alex
Thomson, Andrew C.
West, William B.
McCabe, Shannon E.
Quinonez Zanabria, Eduardo
Graham, Derrick B.
Ronquillo, Yasmyne C.
Hoopes, Phillip C.
author_facet Moshirfar, Majid
Villarreal, Alex
Thomson, Andrew C.
West, William B.
McCabe, Shannon E.
Quinonez Zanabria, Eduardo
Graham, Derrick B.
Ronquillo, Yasmyne C.
Hoopes, Phillip C.
author_sort Moshirfar, Majid
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) has been well documented, but outcomes of PRK enhancement following PRK remain understudied. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and predictability of PRK enhancement in patients with residual refractive error after primary PRK and compare these results to prior studies as well as Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety and efficacy clinical endpoints. METHODS: This non-randomized, retrospective chart analysis included eyes with a history of PRK that underwent PRK enhancement at a single center. Post-enhancement data were documented at 3-month and 1-year visits. Patient characteristics between the study group and a control group who underwent primary PRK only were compared. Safety and efficacy measures included change in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), change in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), amount of induced astigmatism, and presence of serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 188 eyes from 141 patients were included. When compared to the control group, women underwent PRK enhancement at a higher rate than men (P = 0.004). The group undergoing PRK enhancement had a higher sphere (P = 0.013) and spherical equivalent (P = 0.004) than the control group at the time of primary PRK. MRSE was reduced to − 0.97 ± 0.72 D (− 2.25 to + 2.13 D) from pre-enhancement values of − 0.98 ± 0.66 D (− 2.75 to + 1.75 D) and stable over 12-month visits with 86% and 98% of eyes within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D of target, respectively. UDVA of 20/20 or better was achieved in 75% of eyes. The UDVA of 75% of eyes remained the same or improved by 1 or more Snellen lines compared with pre-enhancement CDVA. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that, when compared with previous studies, modern PRK enhancement after PRK has improved visual acuity and refractive outcomes. Though PRK enhancement is not an FDA approved procedure, we show that it meets or exceeds the FDA criteria for the correction of refractive error.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7886917
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78869172021-03-03 PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study Moshirfar, Majid Villarreal, Alex Thomson, Andrew C. West, William B. McCabe, Shannon E. Quinonez Zanabria, Eduardo Graham, Derrick B. Ronquillo, Yasmyne C. Hoopes, Phillip C. Ophthalmol Ther Case Series INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) has been well documented, but outcomes of PRK enhancement following PRK remain understudied. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and predictability of PRK enhancement in patients with residual refractive error after primary PRK and compare these results to prior studies as well as Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety and efficacy clinical endpoints. METHODS: This non-randomized, retrospective chart analysis included eyes with a history of PRK that underwent PRK enhancement at a single center. Post-enhancement data were documented at 3-month and 1-year visits. Patient characteristics between the study group and a control group who underwent primary PRK only were compared. Safety and efficacy measures included change in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), change in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), amount of induced astigmatism, and presence of serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 188 eyes from 141 patients were included. When compared to the control group, women underwent PRK enhancement at a higher rate than men (P = 0.004). The group undergoing PRK enhancement had a higher sphere (P = 0.013) and spherical equivalent (P = 0.004) than the control group at the time of primary PRK. MRSE was reduced to − 0.97 ± 0.72 D (− 2.25 to + 2.13 D) from pre-enhancement values of − 0.98 ± 0.66 D (− 2.75 to + 1.75 D) and stable over 12-month visits with 86% and 98% of eyes within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D of target, respectively. UDVA of 20/20 or better was achieved in 75% of eyes. The UDVA of 75% of eyes remained the same or improved by 1 or more Snellen lines compared with pre-enhancement CDVA. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that, when compared with previous studies, modern PRK enhancement after PRK has improved visual acuity and refractive outcomes. Though PRK enhancement is not an FDA approved procedure, we show that it meets or exceeds the FDA criteria for the correction of refractive error. Springer Healthcare 2021-01-30 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7886917/ /pubmed/33515419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-021-00331-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Case Series
Moshirfar, Majid
Villarreal, Alex
Thomson, Andrew C.
West, William B.
McCabe, Shannon E.
Quinonez Zanabria, Eduardo
Graham, Derrick B.
Ronquillo, Yasmyne C.
Hoopes, Phillip C.
PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title_full PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title_fullStr PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title_full_unstemmed PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title_short PRK Enhancement for Residual Refractive Error After Primary PRK: A Retrospective Study
title_sort prk enhancement for residual refractive error after primary prk: a retrospective study
topic Case Series
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7886917/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33515419
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-021-00331-8
work_keys_str_mv AT moshirfarmajid prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT villarrealalex prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT thomsonandrewc prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT westwilliamb prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT mccabeshannone prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT quinonezzanabriaeduardo prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT grahamderrickb prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT ronquilloyasmynec prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy
AT hoopesphillipc prkenhancementforresidualrefractiveerrorafterprimaryprkaretrospectivestudy