Pain, wound healing and refractive comparison of mechanical and transepithelial debridement in photorefractive keratectomy for myopia: Results of 1 year follow-up

dc.authorid0000-0001-8197-2458
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Ugur
dc.contributor.authorBozkurt, Ercument
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Burcu
dc.contributor.authorDemirok, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, Omer F.
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-10T19:48:54Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.departmentİstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To compare the efficacy, safety and postoperative pain of mechanical versus transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) techniques. Setting: Cornea and refractive surgery subspecialty. Design: Prospective clinical trial. Methods: This prospective comparative study included 84 eyes of 42 patients with myopia who received mechanical PRK (m-PRK) in 1 eye and transepithelial PRK (t-PRK) in the contralateral eye. The mean patient age was 28.5 +/- 6.3 years (range 20-46 years). Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refractions, postoperative epithelial healing time, surgical time, postoperative pain rating and corneal haze were recorded. Results: At week 1, statistically the UDVA was significantly better in the t-PRK eyes; however, at 3 months, similar refractive stability was achieved in both groups. The mean spherical equivalent (SE) decreased from -2.44 +/- 1.00 D (m-PRK eyes) and -2.88 +/- 1.24 D (t-PRK eyes) at baseline to -0.19 +/- 0.38 D and -0.30 +/- 040 D, respectively, after 1 year. Surgical time was 98.6 +/- 9.8 s in m-PRK eyes and 58.0 +/- 6.4 s in t-PRK eyes. On postoperative days 1 and 3, using the global assessment rating, 81% of mPRK eyes that had pain, reported more pain than that reported for the tPRK eyes. In addition, m-PRK treated eyes demonstrated higher mean pain scores based on the 11-point numerical rating scale and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The mean time to complete epithelial healing was 2.19 +/- 0.39 days (t-PRK) and 3.76 +/- 0.43 days (m-PRK). Conclusion: t-PRK for mild-to-moderate myopia was more comfortable than conventional m-PRK; patients had less pain, and faster healing time. (C) 2014 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.clae.2014.07.001
dc.identifier.endpage426
dc.identifier.issn1367-0484
dc.identifier.issn1476-5411
dc.identifier.issue6
dc.identifier.pmid25081522
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84922707787
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage420
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2014.07.001
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14730/11863
dc.identifier.volume37
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000345541700005
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.ispartofContact Lens & Anterior Eye
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250302
dc.subjectPhotorefractive keratectomy
dc.subjectLASER
dc.subjectCornea
dc.titlePain, wound healing and refractive comparison of mechanical and transepithelial debridement in photorefractive keratectomy for myopia: Results of 1 year follow-up
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar