Prophylactic corneal cross-linking in LASIK surgery: effects on visual outcome and recovery time

D. Oh, Y. Chan, Sao-Bing Lee, J. See
{"title":"Prophylactic corneal cross-linking in LASIK surgery: effects on visual outcome and recovery time","authors":"D. Oh, Y. Chan, Sao-Bing Lee, J. See","doi":"10.35119/ASJOO.V17I1.451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Collagen cross-linking is a useful adjunct in preventing corneal ectasia after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). This study aimed to evaluate whether prophylactic cross-linking in IntraLase LASIK affects optimum visual outcome and recovery time in the immediate post-surgery period and is associated with any side effects. \nMethods: This was a retrospective case study on the right eyes of 100 Chinese subjects aged 18 to 40 years who underwent IntraLase LASIK. Fifty subjects who underwentcross-linking after completing LASIK (Group A) were compared with 50 subjects who did not undergo LASIK (Group B). Cases were evaluated for pre- and post-operative spherical equivalent, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), recovery time and presence of side effects. \nResults: At 1 week post-LASIK, mean (SD) UDVA of Group A subjects was poorer than Group B, at 1.05 (0.19) vs 1.17 (0.19) (p = 0.036); however, there was no significant difference in CDVA (p = 0.095). By 1 month post-LASIK, differences in both UDVA and CDVA were insignificant (p = 0.055, 0.106, respectively). Mean recovery time was 2.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.64-4.7) days longer in Group A (p = 0.010), although by 1 month post-LASIK, both groups were able to achieve CDVA equal to or better than that achieved pre-LASIK. Incidence of mild inflammation and dry eyes post-LASIK was similar in both groups (p = 1.00, 0.749, respectively); no other complications were observed. \nConclusion: No differences in visual outcomes at and occurrence of side effects at 1 month post-LASIK were observed between subjects who underwent cross-linking prior to refractive surgery and those who did not. However, the group that underwent cross-linking had a slightly longer mean recovery time. Our study supports prophylactic cross-linking as a safe procedure that does not affect immediate visual outcomes among the Chinese population when used in adjunct with LASIK surgery.","PeriodicalId":39864,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"17 1","pages":"61-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35119/ASJOO.V17I1.451","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Collagen cross-linking is a useful adjunct in preventing corneal ectasia after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). This study aimed to evaluate whether prophylactic cross-linking in IntraLase LASIK affects optimum visual outcome and recovery time in the immediate post-surgery period and is associated with any side effects. Methods: This was a retrospective case study on the right eyes of 100 Chinese subjects aged 18 to 40 years who underwent IntraLase LASIK. Fifty subjects who underwentcross-linking after completing LASIK (Group A) were compared with 50 subjects who did not undergo LASIK (Group B). Cases were evaluated for pre- and post-operative spherical equivalent, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), recovery time and presence of side effects. Results: At 1 week post-LASIK, mean (SD) UDVA of Group A subjects was poorer than Group B, at 1.05 (0.19) vs 1.17 (0.19) (p = 0.036); however, there was no significant difference in CDVA (p = 0.095). By 1 month post-LASIK, differences in both UDVA and CDVA were insignificant (p = 0.055, 0.106, respectively). Mean recovery time was 2.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.64-4.7) days longer in Group A (p = 0.010), although by 1 month post-LASIK, both groups were able to achieve CDVA equal to or better than that achieved pre-LASIK. Incidence of mild inflammation and dry eyes post-LASIK was similar in both groups (p = 1.00, 0.749, respectively); no other complications were observed. Conclusion: No differences in visual outcomes at and occurrence of side effects at 1 month post-LASIK were observed between subjects who underwent cross-linking prior to refractive surgery and those who did not. However, the group that underwent cross-linking had a slightly longer mean recovery time. Our study supports prophylactic cross-linking as a safe procedure that does not affect immediate visual outcomes among the Chinese population when used in adjunct with LASIK surgery.
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
LASIK手术中预防性角膜交联对视力和恢复时间的影响
引言:胶原交联是预防激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK)后角膜扩张的有效辅助手段。本研究旨在评估LASIK术中预防性交联是否会影响术后即刻的最佳视觉效果和恢复时间,并与任何副作用有关。方法:对100例18~40岁的中国人行准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术的右眼进行回顾性病例研究。将50名完成LASIK术后未进行交叉连接的受试者(A组)与50名未进行LASIK术的受试人(B组)进行比较。评估病例的术前和术后球面当量、裸眼远视力(UDVA)和矫正远视力(CDVA)、恢复时间和是否存在副作用。结果:LASIK术后1周,A组受试者的平均UDVA(SD)低于B组,分别为1.05(0.19)和1.17(0.19)(p=0.036);然而,CDVA没有显著差异(p=0.095)。到LASIK术后1个月,UDVA和CDVA的差异不显著(分别为p=0.055和0.106)。A组的平均恢复时间延长了2.72天(95%置信区间[CI]=0.64-4.7)(p=0.010),尽管到LASIK术后1个月,两组的CDVA均达到或优于LASIK术前。LASIK术后轻度炎症和干眼的发生率在两组中相似(p分别为1.00和0.749);未观察到其他并发症。结论:LASIK术后1个月,在屈光手术前接受交叉连接的受试者和未接受交叉连接手术的受试人之间,没有观察到视觉结果和副作用发生的差异。然而,进行交联的组的平均恢复时间稍长。我们的研究支持预防性交联作为一种安全的程序,当与LASIK手术一起使用时,不会影响中国人群的即时视觉结果。
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
Asian Journal of Ophthalmology
Asian Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of OPHTHALMOLOGY is the official peer-reviewed journal of the South East Asia Glaucoma Interest Group (SEAGIG) and is indexed in EMBASE/Excerpta Medica. Asian Journal of OPHTHALMOLOGY is published quarterly (four [4] issues per year) by Scientific Communications International Limited. The journal is published on-line only and is distributed free of cost via the SEAGIG website.
期刊最新文献
Is zero incidence of postoperative endophthalmitis after cataract surgery achievable Is indiscriminate use of intracameral prophylactic antibiotics in cataract surgery appropriate Ultrasound monitoring for minocyclineinduced idiopathic intracranial hypertension Subconjunctival antibiotics: an alternative to intracameral antibiotics for endophthalmitis prophylaxis in cataract surgery Changes in practice guidelines and regulations in ophthalmology due to COVID-19
×
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