PRK and Amblyopia

Abstract

We opened up the October 2005 Ophthalmology with great anticipation based on the contents title “Can We Utilize Photorefractive Keratectomy to Improve Visual Acuity in Adult Amblyopic Eyes?”1Lanza M. Rosa N. Capasso L. et al.Can we utilize photorefractive keratectomy to improve visual acuity in adult amblyopic eyes?.Ophthalmology. 2005; 112: 1684-1691Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar However, the article’s “Results” were so poorly written that they are impossible to understand. The statement that “uncorrected VA [visual acuity] (UCVA) was between 0.08 and 1.15 lines,” for us, is incomprehensible. The authors do not explain if they are reporting their VA results in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution units or decimal equivalents of Snellen acuity (e.g., 3/6 or 20/40 = 0.5). The entire “Results” is filled with VA results in this format, describing “VA was between 0.1 and 1.2 lines (mean, 0.55±0.23). This is especially disturbing for me because they report “significant improvement over the preoperative values (P = 5×10−7). Twenty-two of 27 eyes (81%) showed ≥1 lines of improvement. Nineteen of 27 eyes (70%) showed ≥2 lines of improvement.” Finally, there was no discussion of the improvement in terms of the above with regard to the normal eye, making it virtually impossible for the reader to decipher the results. Because this study almost certainly will be used to justify refractive surgery on adult patients with amblyopia, we are very curious to know whether these patients improved from 20/400 to 20/200 or from 20/60 to 20/40 etc. We find it equally curious that these glaring discrepancies made it past the various editorial echelons of the Journal. We opened up the October 2005 Ophthalmology with great anticipation based on the contents title “Can We Utilize Photorefractive Keratectomy to Improve Visual Acuity in Adult Amblyopic Eyes?”1Lanza M. Rosa N. Capasso L. et al.Can we utilize photorefractive keratectomy to improve visual acuity in adult amblyopic eyes?.Ophthalmology. 2005; 112: 1684-1691Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar However, the article’s “Results” were so poorly written that they are impossible to understand. The statement that “uncorrected VA [visual acuity] (UCVA) was between 0.08 and 1.15 lines,” for us, is incomprehensible. The authors do not explain if they are reporting their VA results in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution units or decimal equivalents of Snellen acuity (e.g., 3/6 or 20/40 = 0.5). The entire “Results” is filled with VA results in this format, describing “VA was between 0.1 and 1.2 lines (mean, 0.55±0.23). This is especially disturbing for me because they report “significant improvement over the preoperative values (P = 5×10−7). Twenty-two of 27 eyes (81%) showed ≥1 lines of improvement. Nineteen of 27 eyes (70%) showed ≥2 lines of improvement.” Finally, there was no discussion of the improvement in terms of the above with regard to the normal eye, making it virtually impossible for the reader to decipher the results. Because this study almost certainly will be used to justify refractive surgery on adult patients with amblyopia, we are very curious to know whether these patients improved from 20/400 to 20/200 or from 20/60 to 20/40 etc. We find it equally curious that these glaring discrepancies made it past the various editorial echelons of the Journal. PRK and Amblyopia: Author ReplyOphthalmologyVol. 113Issue 6PreviewWe are very glad to know that Drs Bowers and Enzenauer opened the October 2005 Ophthalmology with great anticipation because of our article. However, we are sorry that they had trouble understanding our results. As they correctly pointed out, we should have explained if we were reporting our visual results in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution units or decimal equivalents of Snellen acuity, and they offer examples of how we should have reported our results: 3/6, 20/40, or 0.5. We apologize for this, but we reported the results as 0.1, 0.8, 1.2, etc. Full-Text PDF