{"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.
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.