Abstract

Purpose: Additional analyses of outcomes of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) are still necessary to improve the safety of LASEK. Therefore, in our study, outcomes were assessed retrospectively in 561 eyes that underwent LASEK treatment. Methods: Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and residual spherical equivalent were analyzed at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. We assessed four subgroups based on the degree of preoperative myopia considering mean BSCVA and loss of two or more lines. Results: Mean UCVAs and BSCVAs were obtained at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (1.23/1.35 and 1.23/1.37, respectively). The mean predictability was within ±0.125 diopters. Conversely, the safety indexes were 0.94 and 0.96 respectively, and the efficacy indexes were 0.86 and 0.86 at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, respectively. 8.4% eyes and 5.2% eyes lost two or more lines of BSCVA at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, respectively. The mean BSCVAs of the high or ultra-high groups were significantly lower than those of the low or mild groups both 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. The incidence rates of losing two or more lines of BSCVA in the high or ultra-high myopia groups were significantly greater than in the low or mild groups at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. Conclusion: LASEK predictably corrected myopia achieving >1.2 in UCVA and BSCVA. However, the safety and efficacy indexes were

Highlights

  • Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) combines the advantages of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) while avoiding the disadvantages of LASIK

  • Analyses of large numbers of patients treated with LASEK have been published [7] [15] [16]

  • Zhao et al [15] reported a comprehensive literature search using Cochrane Collaboration methodology to identify randomized controlled trials of PRK (499 eyes) versus LASEK (512 eyes); this study had the drawbacks of being a systematic review and meta-analysis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) combines the advantages of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) while avoiding the disadvantages of LASIK. It has no flap-related complications, reduces the risk of keratectasia associated with LASIK and had been shown to be a safe, effective and predictable treatment for low [1], mild [2] and high [3]-[6] myopia from its introduction [7] [8]. 14.3% of eyes reportedly lose more than one line after LASEK compared with 1.2% for LASIK at 1 year [6]. There is controversy about the outcomes of LASEK [12]-[14]

Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.