Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for hyperopia correction

Settas, George; Settas, C; Minos, Evangelos

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007112

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The refractive and visual outcomes remain inferior compared with myopic keratorefractive procedures. Although laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is more often used, surface techniques, such as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), can also provide good results for hyperopia up to +4.5 dioptres (D) 1. The predictability, safety and refractive stability diminish as the hyperopic correction increases 2.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-year outcomes after high hyperopia correction using photorefractive keratectomy with a large ablation zone

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-year outcomes after high hyperopia correction using photorefractive keratectomy with a large ablation zone

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, over the past quarter of a century, the introduction and refinement of excimer laser (7)(8)(9)(10)(11) , refractive lens exchange, multifocal (12) and phakic intraocular lens technologies (13) have heralded a new era in refractive surgery and offer promise for the correction of hyperopia. Published studies of hyperopic laser photorefractive keratectomy (H-PRK) and hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis (H-LASIK) have demonstrated both efficacy and safety and such procedures are now in wide-spread clinical usage (7)(8)(9)(10)(11) . However, compared to myopic excimer laser kerato-refractive procedures, results for hyperopic treatments are inferior (14) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, compared to myopic excimer laser kerato-refractive procedures, results for hyperopic treatments are inferior (14) . Clinical studies of H-PRK and H-LASIK report acceptable efficacy for corrections up to approximately +4.0 diopters (D) but with diminished predictability, refractive stability and safety for higher order corrections (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(15)(16) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sixteen-year follow-up of hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis

Dave

O’Brart

Wagh

et al. 2016

Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following excimer laser ablation of targeted stromal tissue to reshape the curvature of the corneal stroma, the flap is repositioned. This results in reduced pain and a quicker recovery in patients undergoing LASIK compared to those undergoing photorefractive keratectomy in which the central corneal epithelium is removed entirely 2–4. LASIK surgery is generally preferred by patients5 and is currently the most common keratorefractive procedure performed 6–9…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% in refractive surgery: a retrospective chart review of post-LASIK patients

Clark¹,

Nielsen²,

McDonald³

et al. 2013

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo evaluate the safety of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% when used in laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) prophylactic antibiotic regimens.MethodsRetrospective surveillance of LASIK surgery cases where besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% or moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5% were prescribed as prophylactic medications. Surgeons from nine US surgical centers provided retrospective case information on surgical outcomes from consecutive cases and reported any adverse events related to the antibacterial used. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse drug reactions.ResultsA total of 801 case reports (801 eyes; 534 besifloxacin, 267 moxifloxacin) were obtained. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age at time of surgery was 36.1 (10.6) years. The mean (SD) duration of antibiotic treatment was 8.6 (2.2) days in the besifloxacin group and 8.0 (2.3) in the moxifloxacin group; daily dosing frequency was higher in the moxifloxacin group preoperatively, on the day of surgery, and postoperatively. There were no reports of adverse drug reactions for the 801 eyes in this surveillance. There were no differences between the besifloxacin and moxifloxacin treatment groups in rates of unexpected corneal findings (2.1% vs 1.5%, P = 0.949). The distribution of final visual acuity for the besifloxacin and moxifloxacin groups were similar (P = 0.793). Most cases had a final visual acuity of 20/20 or better.ConclusionIn this retrospective surveillance study, the prophylactic use of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% and moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5% in patients undergoing LASIK surgery was not associated with any adverse drug reactions.

show abstract

Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for hyperopia correction

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Three-year outcomes after high hyperopia correction using photorefractive keratectomy with a large ablation zone

Three-year outcomes after high hyperopia correction using photorefractive keratectomy with a large ablation zone

Sixteen-year follow-up of hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis

Safety of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% in refractive surgery: a retrospective chart review of post-LASIK patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About