2014
DOI: 10.2147/opth.s66608
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of clinical outcomes in PRK with a standard and aspherical optimized profile: a full case analysis of 100 eyes with 1-year follow-up

Abstract: PurposeOne hundred eyes from 55 adult patients with myopia were retrospectively studied to determine the comparative safety, efficacy, and predictability of aberration smart ablation (ASA) and a new advanced ablation algorithm (Triple-A) using the MEL® 80 excimer laser.MethodsFifty myopic eyes with a manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) between −1.0 diopters (D) and −9.75 D were consecutively treated with photorefractive keratec-tomy ASA, and 50 myopic eyes with an MRSE between −1.38 D and −11.0 D w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The enhanced energy correction in the Triple-A profile is stronger than that of ASA and TSA profiles. In two reports, this achieved better predictability compared with the ASA profile after LASIK and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) [7, 8]. In our study we demonstrated better predictability achieved with the MEL 90 and Triple-A profile than with the MEL 80 and TSA profile after LASEK.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…The enhanced energy correction in the Triple-A profile is stronger than that of ASA and TSA profiles. In two reports, this achieved better predictability compared with the ASA profile after LASIK and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) [7, 8]. In our study we demonstrated better predictability achieved with the MEL 90 and Triple-A profile than with the MEL 80 and TSA profile after LASEK.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Siedlecki found that the Triple-A tissue-saving algorithm gave equally good results, whereas enhancement with the aspherically optimized profile (ASA), used in two eyes, resulted in overcorrection [15]. Dausch also reported that Triple-A was more effective than was standard aspherical surgical intervention in terms of a number of treatment outcome parameters [11] (e.g., MRSE, astigmatism, and efficacy index). The two surgical procedures were equivalent in terms of safety.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The one-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare data before and after surgery. The efficacy index and the safety index were calculated as previously described [11]. Chi-square test was used to compare the rates in accuracy and astigmatism evaluation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This program was designed to maintain the prolate shape of the cornea from −3 to −6 D of sphere correction. 42 , 43 In addition, the wavefront-guided LASIK program was applied for all cases in the LASIK group; SMILE does not have such a program. If an aspheric lenticule or a wavefront-guided lenticule creation protocol was available for SMILE surgery, the difference between the SMILE and LASIK groups could potentially be larger.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%