ONE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP RESULTS OF PHOTOREFRACTIVE KERATECTOMY FOR LOW, MODERATE, AND HIGH PRIMARY ASTIGMATISM

Citation
I. Kremer et al., ONE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP RESULTS OF PHOTOREFRACTIVE KERATECTOMY FOR LOW, MODERATE, AND HIGH PRIMARY ASTIGMATISM, Ophthalmology, 103(5), 1996, pp. 741-748
Citations number
16
Categorie Soggetti
Ophthalmology
Journal title
ISSN journal
01616420
Volume
103
Issue
5
Year of publication
1996
Pages
741 - 748
Database
ISI
SICI code
0161-6420(1996)103:5<741:OFROPK>2.0.ZU;2-X
Abstract
Objective: To study the efficacy of excimer laser photorefractive kera tectomy (PRK) for high, moderate, and low degrees of primary myopic as tigmatism. Patients and Methods: Ninety-two eyes of 54 patients with d ifferent degrees of compound myopic astigmatism underwent PRK. The eye s were divided by degree of refractive astigmatism into three groups-h igh (-2.75 to -5.0 diopters [D]), moderate(-1.25 to -2.50 D), and low (less than or equal to-1.0 D). Refraction, corneal topography, slit-la mp findings, and visual acuity with and without correction were assess ed. Results: At 12 months, the mean reduction from the preoperative re fractive cylinder was 80.7% in the high astigmatism group, 68.4% in th e moderate astigmatism group, and 47.6% in the low astigmatism group. The post-treatment residual cylinder axis remained stable in 23 (38.3% ) of 60 eyes and deviated in 37 (61.7%) of 60 eyes. The maximal deviat ion of the residual cylinder axis was 15 degrees. Of the 89.2% of eyes with low cylinder, 81.8% had moderate cylinder, and 85% of the eyes w ith high cylinder achieved a final uncorrected visual acuity between 2 0/20 and 20/35 at 12 months. Conclusions: A statistically significant reduction in the refractive cylinder was found in the high, moderate, and low astigmatism groups. The difference between the mean reduction of the high and moderate cylinders compared with the mean reduction of the low cylinders also was found to be statistically significant. The laser used in this study is an efficient tool for correcting high and moderate astigmatism. However, regarding low astigmatism, it was foun d to be less effective.