Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
PresbyPRK vs presbyLASIK using the SUPRACOR algorithm and micromonovision in presbyopic hyperopic patients: visual and refractive results at 12 months.
Boucenna, William; Hagège, Alain; Lussato, Mikhael; Morfeq, Hussein; Kochbati, Elias; Jany, Benjamin; Froussart-Maille, Françoise; Delbarre, Maxime.
Afiliación
  • Boucenna W; From the Ophthalmology Department, Amiens University Hospital Center, Amiens, France (William, Benjamin); Laser Victor Hugo Center, Paris, France (Alain, Mikhael); Ophthalmology Department, King AbdulAziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Hussein); Agence de la Biomedecine, Saint-Denis, France (Elias); Ophthalmology Department, Percy Military Hospital, Clamart, France (Françoise, Maxime, Mikhael).
J Cataract Refract Surg ; 47(7): 878-885, 2021 Jul 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33315735
PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcome and refractive results between presbyopic photorefractive keratectomy (presbyPRK) and presbyopic laser in situ keratomileusis (presbyLASIK) in presbyopic hyperopic patients using micromonovision and the SUPRACOR algorithm. SETTING: Percy Military Hospital and private Laser Victor Hugo Center, France. DESIGN: Observational retrospective nonrandomized. METHODS: Twenty-three patients who had undergone presbyPRK or presbyLASIK were included and followed up for 12-months. Far and near visual acuity without correction in monocular and binocular, measurement of distance visual acuity with correction in monocular, evaluation of spherical equivalent (SE), aberrometry, and patient satisfaction were measured and analyzed in this study. RESULTS: The study included 26 eyes of 13 patients in the presbyLASIK group and 20 eyes of 10 patients in the presbyPRK group. The mean age was 55.43 ± 4.6 years. Uncorrected binocular distance visual acuity was 0.030 ± 0.05 logMAR in the presbyLASIK group and 0 logMAR in the presbyPRK group (P = .066). Binocular near visual acuity without correction was 0.21 ± 0.11 logMAR in the presbyLASIK group and 0.30 ± 0.15 logMAR in the presbyPRK group (P = .0398). For the dominant eyes, the SE was -0.08 ± 0.48 diopters (D) in the presbyLASIK group and 0.16 ± 0.82 D in the presbyPRK group (P = .3995). For nondominant eyes, the SE was -0.44 ± 0.50 D in the presbyLASIK group and 0.12 ± 0.65 D in the presbyPRK group (P = .0254). CONCLUSIONS: PresbyPRK and presbyLASIK were comparable in efficacy, stability, predictability, and safety. PresbyPRK could be a safe and effective surgical alternative for the hyperopic presbyopic patient.
Asunto(s)
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Presbiopía / Queratomileusis por Láser In Situ / Hiperopía Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: J Cataract Refract Surg Asunto de la revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Presbiopía / Queratomileusis por Láser In Situ / Hiperopía Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Humans / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: J Cataract Refract Surg Asunto de la revista: OFTALMOLOGIA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos