PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, safety, predictability, and vector analysis indices of LASIK and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for correction of high cylinder of greater than 3 diopters (D) in myopic eyes. METHODS: The efficacy, safety, and predictability of LASIK or PRK performed in 114 consecutive randomly selected myopic eyes with an astigmatism of greater than 3 D were retrospectively analyzed at the 2- to 6-month follow-up visits. Vector analysis of the cylindrical correction was compared between the treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 57 eyes receiving PRK and 57 eyes receiving LASIK of 114 refractive surgery candidates were enrolled in the study. No statistically significant difference in efficacy [efficacy index = 0.76 (±0.32) for PRK vs 0.74 (±0.19) for LASIK (P = .82)], safety [safety index = 1.10 (±0.26) for PRK vs 1.01 (±0.17) for LASIK (P = .121)], or predictability [achieved astigmatism < 1 D in 39% of PRK- and 54% of LASIK-treated eyes, and < 2 D in 88% of PRK- and 89% of LASIK-treated eyes (P = .218)] was demonstrated. Using Alpins vector analysis, the surgically induced astigmatism and difference vector were not significantly different between the surgery methods, whereas the correction index showed a slight and significant advantage of LASIK over PRK (1.25 for PRK and 1.06 for LASIK, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: LASIK and PRK are comparably safe, effective, and predictable procedures for excimer laser correction of high astigmatism of greater than 3 D in myopic eyes. Predictability of the correction of the cylindrical component is lower than that of the spherical equivalent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Katz et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: