Effects of Lotrafilcon A and Senofilcon A Bandage Contact Lenses on Visual Outcome and Ocular Comfort After Photorefractive Keratectomy.

Konuralp Yakar, Göksu Alaçamlı
{"title":"Effects of Lotrafilcon A and Senofilcon A Bandage Contact Lenses on Visual Outcome and Ocular Comfort After Photorefractive Keratectomy.","authors":"Konuralp Yakar, Göksu Alaçamlı","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2024.03392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the efficacy of two different silicone hydrogel bandage contact lenses (BCLs) in terms of visual rehabilitation and ocular discomfort following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective study included 60 eyes of 30 patients who underwent bilateral PRK surgery to correct myopia and/or astigmatism refractive errors. Following surgery, lotrafilcon A BCLs were applied to the right eye and senofilcon A BCLs were applied to the left eye. When the BCLs were removed on postoperative day 5, subjective ocular symptoms of discomfort were evaluated on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 indicated no discomfort and 10 indicated maximum discomfort. The postoperative spherical equivalents (SE) of both eyes were compared at 15 days and 1 month. Postoperative SE ≤ ±0.50 diopters was accepted as emmetropia. The number of patients who achieved emmetropia was also compared at 15 days and 1 month postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scores for ocular discomfort in the first 5 days postoperatively did not differ significantly between the BCLs (p>0.05). However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two lenses in terms of SE values at postoperative 15 days and 1 month (p<0.05). Eyes fitted with the senofilcon A BCL demonstrated better postoperative visual rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although post-PRK ocular discomfort scores did not differ significantly between the two BCLs, the senofilcon A lenses performed better in terms of achieving the target SE postoperatively.</p>","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"54 6","pages":"318-323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11707456/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2024.03392","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of two different silicone hydrogel bandage contact lenses (BCLs) in terms of visual rehabilitation and ocular discomfort following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

Materials and methods: This prospective study included 60 eyes of 30 patients who underwent bilateral PRK surgery to correct myopia and/or astigmatism refractive errors. Following surgery, lotrafilcon A BCLs were applied to the right eye and senofilcon A BCLs were applied to the left eye. When the BCLs were removed on postoperative day 5, subjective ocular symptoms of discomfort were evaluated on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 indicated no discomfort and 10 indicated maximum discomfort. The postoperative spherical equivalents (SE) of both eyes were compared at 15 days and 1 month. Postoperative SE ≤ ±0.50 diopters was accepted as emmetropia. The number of patients who achieved emmetropia was also compared at 15 days and 1 month postoperatively.

Results: Scores for ocular discomfort in the first 5 days postoperatively did not differ significantly between the BCLs (p>0.05). However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two lenses in terms of SE values at postoperative 15 days and 1 month (p<0.05). Eyes fitted with the senofilcon A BCL demonstrated better postoperative visual rehabilitation.

Conclusion: Although post-PRK ocular discomfort scores did not differ significantly between the two BCLs, the senofilcon A lenses performed better in terms of achieving the target SE postoperatively.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lotrafilcon A 和 Senofilcon A 绷带隐形眼镜对光屈光性角膜切割术后视觉效果和眼部舒适度的影响。
目的:比较两种不同的硅胶水凝胶绷带隐形眼镜(bcl)在光屈光性角膜切除术(PRK)后视力康复和眼部不适方面的疗效。材料和方法:本前瞻性研究包括30例患者60只眼,接受双侧PRK手术矫正近视和/或散光屈光不正。手术后,右眼应用lotrafilcon A bcl,左眼应用senofilcon A bcl。当bcl在术后第5天移除时,主观眼部不适症状以0到10的等级进行评估,其中0表示没有不适,10表示最大的不适。比较术后15天和1个月时双眼的球形当量(SE)。术后SE≤±0.50屈光度为斜视。在术后15天和1个月时,还比较了达到斜视的患者数量。结果:两组患者术后5天眼部不适评分差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。然而,两种bcl晶体术后15天和1个月的SE值差异有统计学意义(p)。结论:尽管两种bcl晶体的prk后眼部不适评分无显著差异,但senofilcon a晶体在术后达到目标SE方面表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Report of a Rare Syndromic Retinal Dystrophy: Asphyxiating Thoracic Dystrophy (Jeune Syndrome). Readability and Appropriateness of Responses Generated by ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot for FAQs in Refractive Surgery. Reply. The Ability of Large Language Models to Generate Patient Information Materials for Retinopathy of Prematurity: Evaluation of Readability, Accuracy, and Comprehensiveness. The Efficacy of Adalimumab Treatment in Pediatric Non-Infectious Uveitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1