-
Eye & Contact Lens Nov 2023This study systematically reviewed the performance of bandage contact lenses (BCL) such as lotrafilcon A, lotrafilcon B, senofilcon A, balafilcon A, and comfilcon A as...
This study systematically reviewed the performance of bandage contact lenses (BCL) such as lotrafilcon A, lotrafilcon B, senofilcon A, balafilcon A, and comfilcon A as postoperative treatment in different ocular surgeries. A systematic search of English and Chinese databases (from inception to December 2021) was conducted for studies reporting the efficacy of BCLs after ocular surgeries. Postoperative symptoms, corneal healing, and visual outcomes were studied. Overall, 38 studies were identified. Bandage contact lens was applied as a postoperative aid in corneal refractive, cataract, and vitrectomy surgeries. Most studies were on photorefractive keratectomy. Reduced postoperative symptoms were observed within 4 hr to 3 days, whereas re-epithelization of the cornea and healing was complete within 3 to 7 days after ocular surgeries except for vitrectomy. In a vitrectomy, greater comfort and improved corneal epithelium were observed on the seventh day after surgery. An improvement in dry eye symptoms was observed at 7 days with considerable benefits observed after 1 month of cataract surgery. These findings indicate that BCLs are effective for improving postoperative symptoms and facilitation of early visual rehabilitation with a wear time of 8 hr to 7 days depending on the type of ocular surgery.
Topics: Humans; Ophthalmology; Bandages, Hydrocolloid; Contact Lenses, Hydrophilic; Photorefractive Keratectomy; Cataract
PubMed: 37816246
DOI: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000001021 -
Ophthalmic Research 2023Phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) has been increasingly used to treat severe recurrent corneal erosion syndrome (RCES) patients who do not respond to other treatments.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) has been increasingly used to treat severe recurrent corneal erosion syndrome (RCES) patients who do not respond to other treatments. However, the efficacy and complication of each study are currently uncertain due to varying rates.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of the PTK for recurrent corneal erosions.
METHODS
This article performed a systematic literature research in Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science for the literature on PTK treatment of RCES until December 20, 2022. The extracted data including recurrence rate and the adverse event rate were used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The recurrence rate was 18% (95% CI, 13%-24%) (129/700 eyes). Subgroup analysis showed that the RCE recurrence was 17% (95% CI, 9%-24%) after trauma and 22% (95% CI, 11%-32%) in the corneal dystrophy group. Treatment-related adverse events included subepithelial haze, hyperopic shift, and decrease of the best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. In this study, the incidence of these events was 13% (95% CI, 6%-21%), 20% (95% CI, 11%-28%), and 11% (95% CI, 5%-16%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
PTK represented a valuable treatment option for patients with recurrent corneal erosions, especially those with traumatic injuries, which had minimal side effects.
Topics: Humans; Lasers, Excimer; Follow-Up Studies; Visual Acuity; Photorefractive Keratectomy; Corneal Dystrophies, Hereditary; Cornea; Corneal Ulcer; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome; Corneal Diseases
PubMed: 37490883
DOI: 10.1159/000533160 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023The rising prevalence of myopia is a major global public health concern. Economic evaluation of myopia interventions is critical for maximizing the benefits of treatment... (Review)
Review
The rising prevalence of myopia is a major global public health concern. Economic evaluation of myopia interventions is critical for maximizing the benefits of treatment and the healthcare system. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of interventions for treating myopia. Five databases were searched - Embase, Emcare, PubMed, Web of Science, and ProQuest - from inception to July 2022 and a total of 2,099 articles were identified. After careful assessments, 6 studies met the eligibility criteria. The primary outcomes of this systematic review were costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The secondary outcomes included utility values and net monetary benefits (NMB). One study determined the cost-effectiveness of photorefractive screening plus treatment with 0.01% atropine, 2 studies examined cost-effectiveness of corneal refractive surgery, and 3 studies evaluated cost-effectiveness of commonly used therapies for pathologic myopia. Corneal refractive surgeries included laser keratomileusis (LASIK), femtosecond laser-assisted keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Interventions for pathologic myopia included ranibizumab, conbercept, and photodynamic therapy (PDT). At an incremental cost of NZ$ 18 (95% CI 15, 20) (US$ 11) per person, photorefractive screening plus 0.01% atropine resulted in an ICER of NZ$ 1,590/QALY (US$ 1,001/QALY) (95% CI NZ$ 1,390, 1,791) for an incremental QALY of 0.0129 (95% CI 0.0127, 0.0131). The cost of refractive surgery in Europe ranged from €3,075 to €3,123 ([US$4,046 to $4,109 - adjusted to 2021 inflation). QALYs associated with these procedures were 23 (FS-LASIK) and 24 (SMILE and PRK) with utility values of 0.8 and ICERs ranging from approximately €14 (US$17)/QALY to €19 (US$23)/QALY. The ICER of LASIK was US$683/diopter gained (inflation-adjusted). The ICER of ranibizumab and PDT were £8,778 (US$12,032)/QALY and US$322,460/QALY respectively, with conbercept yielding a saving of 541,974 RMB (US$80,163)/QALY, respectively. The use of 0.01% atropine and corneal refractive surgery were cost-effective for treating myopia. Treating pathologic myopia with ranibizumab and conbercept were more cost-effective than PDT. Prevention of myopia progression is more cost-effective than treating pathologic myopia.
Topics: Humans; Visual Acuity; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis; Ranibizumab; Myopia; Atropine Derivatives
PubMed: 36923029
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1093836 -
Medicine Feb 2023The pregabalin is approved for the management of persistent pain. The aim of this study is to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the use of pregabalin in eye...
BACKGROUND
The pregabalin is approved for the management of persistent pain. The aim of this study is to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the use of pregabalin in eye pain management.
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched until January 2022 for randomized controlled trials. Randomized, double-blinded trials comparing pregabalin with placebo in eye pain management were included. The primary outcome was visual analog scale or numerical rating scale at acute (24 hours) and chronic (≥7 days after surgery) timepoints. The secondary outcomes were analgesic medication requirements and pregabalin-related complications (nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and headache). We also compared the effect of pregabalin on dry-eye syndrome.
MAIN RESULTS
Six relevant articles were identified that studied the use of pregabalin as pain relief for photorefractive keratectomy (n = 2), laser epithelial keratomileusis (n = 1), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (n = 1), eyelid surgery (n = 1), and dacryocystorhinostomy (n = 1). Pregabalin was associated with a significant reduction in pain scores (95% confidence interval = -0.41 [-0.76--0.06]) 24 hours after surgical procedures. The data were insufficient to draw conclusions regarding dry eye symptoms. Because of the high heterogeneity of outcomes regarding adverse effects, there is no conclusion regarding the safety of pregabalin in eye pain.
CONCLUSIONS
Pregabalin reduced acute eye pain but had no significant effect on long-term analgesia after ophthalmological surgery in adults. It had no effect on dry-eye symptoms after ocular surgery. Further studies on the safety of pregabalin in eye pain management are required to draw solid conclusions.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Pregabalin; Eye Pain; Analgesics; Analgesia; Acute Pain; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 36820573
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032875 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in improving vision and visual quality and correcting astigmatism for the...
PURPOSE
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in improving vision and visual quality and correcting astigmatism for the treatment of high astigmatism.
METHODS
Eligible studies and studies comparing the efficacy of SMILE with femtosecond laser-assisted laser keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) or transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (T-PRK) for high astigmatism (≥2.00 D) were identified in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, searched from their inception to 29 May 2022. The references of all searched studies were checked as supplements. The risk of bias was evaluated for each eligible study. The literature was screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and relative data were extracted. Data were extracted and analyzed by ReviewManager 5.4. The primary outcome was post-operative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA). The secondary outcomes included corneal aberrations and vector parameters. The weight mean difference (WMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to assess the strength of the association.
RESULTS
A total of six studies including 380 astigmatism eyes were involved, with 211 high-astigmatism eyes and 31 low-astigmatism eyes undergoing SMILE surgery, 94 high-astigmatism eyes undergoing FS-LASIK surgery, and 44 high-astigmatism eyes undergoing T-PRK surgery. Compared with non-SMILE, SMILE induced more astigmatism (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.07, 95% CI [-0.12 to -0.02], = 0.005) and fewer sphere aberrations (WMD = -0.12, 95% CI [-0.17 to -0.08], < 0.00001). The post-operative UDVA, sphere, spherical equivalent (SE), and higher order aberrations in different surgeries were likewise equivalent. The difference vector and index of success were significantly higher, and the surgically induced astigmatism vector, correction index, and magnitude of error were significantly lower in SMILE.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that SMILE, FS-LASIK, and T-PRK show excellent efficacy, predictability, and safety for myopia. SMILE exhibited less astigmatism refraction predictability and less surgically induced spherical aberrations. There may be more under-correction in SMILE. More randomized, prospective, and large sample-sized studies are needed to confirm these conclusions in the long term.
PubMed: 36743675
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1100241 -
Ophthalmic Research 2022Accommodative esotropia (AET) is characterized by an esodeviation of the eyes due to uncorrected hyperopia, deficient fusional divergence, or high accommodative...
INTRODUCTION
Accommodative esotropia (AET) is characterized by an esodeviation of the eyes due to uncorrected hyperopia, deficient fusional divergence, or high accommodative convergence. Decreasing hyperopia would reduce accommodative convergence and strabismus. We sought to review the existing evidence regarding the outcomes of refractive surgery in patients with AET.
METHODS
A four-database search (Pubmed, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus) was performed from inception to March 2021 using the following MeSH terms: ("Refractive Surgical Procedures" OR "Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ" OR "Photorefractive Keratectomy" OR "Lens Implantation, Intraocular") AND ("Esotropia" OR "Accommodative Esotropia" OR "Refractive Esotropia" OR "Accommodative Strabismus"). No meta-analysis was performed due to studies' heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies including 22 case series enrolling 378 patients and 6 case reports enrolling 8 patients were selected among 185 original abstracts. In the case series, a total of 378 patients (726 eyes) were recruited with an age range of 8-52 years. All studies reported mean follow-up periods of at least 12 months. Photorefractive keratectomy was performed in 7 studies, laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis in 9 studies, laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy was reported in 1 study, and 3 studies implanted intraocular lenses, including iris-fixated and collamer. Considering the adult patients with a preoperative corrected esodeviation ≤10 prism diopters (PD) (n = 129), all but 5 (3.9%) presented orthophoria or ≤10PD after refractive surgery. All children but 4 (4.5%) ended up with an esodeviation ≤10PD after surgery with those exceptions being in the range of 11-15PD. Six case reports were included in this review, comprising a total of 8 patients (16 eyes) with an age range of 7-34 years and a follow-up range of 4-48 months. Six case reports were included in this review, comprising a total of 8 patients (16 eyes) with an age range of 7-34 years and a follow-up range of 4-48 months.
CONCLUSION
Evidence produced so far points out that refractive surgery may be an alternative for spectacle correction for adults with AET ≤10PD. There is not enough evidence to recommend its use for patients under 18 years of age. The safety and predictability of these procedures for this purpose remains unclear as the selection criteria used for these patients are much different than the usual indications and there are no studies with long-term follow-up.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Middle Aged; Young Adult; Esotropia; Hyperopia; Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ; Refraction, Ocular; Strabismus; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 35226900
DOI: 10.1159/000523816 -
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Dec 2021Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is considered a safe approach laser procedure with a clinical significance in correcting myopia results. PRK requires removing the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is considered a safe approach laser procedure with a clinical significance in correcting myopia results. PRK requires removing the whole superficial epithelium. The integrity of the epithelial basement membrane and the deposition of abnormal extracellular matrix can put the cornea in a probable situation for corneal haze formation. Mitomycin C (MMC) is applied after excimer laser ablation as a primary modulator for wound healing, limiting corneal haze formation. We aim to summarize the outcomes of MMC application after laser ablation. We searched Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science till December 2020 using relevant keywords. The data were extracted and pooled as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), using Review Manager software (version 5.4). Our analysis demonstrated a statistically significant result for MMC application over the control group in terms of corneal haze formation postoperatively (RR = 0.29, 95% CI: [0.19, 0.45], P < 0.00001). Regarding corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), no significant difference was observed between the MMC group and the control group (MD = 0.02; 95% CI: [-0.04, 0.07]; P = 0.56). Regarding the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), the analysis favored the MMC application with (MD -0.03, 95% CI: [-0.06, -0.00]; P = 0.05). There was no statistically significant increase in complications with MMC. In conclusion, MMC application after PRK is associated with a lower incidence of corneal haze formation with no statistically significant side effects. The long term effect can show improvement regarding UDVA favoring MMC. However, there is no significant effect of MMCs application regarding CDVA, and SE.
Topics: Alkylating Agents; Humans; Lasers, Excimer; Mitomycin; Myopia; Photorefractive Keratectomy
PubMed: 34826969
DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_3768_20 -
Ophthalmology and Therapy Dec 2021The incidence of ectasia following refractive surgery is unclear. This review sought to determine the worldwide rates of ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK),... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of ectasia following refractive surgery is unclear. This review sought to determine the worldwide rates of ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) based on reports in the literature.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted according to modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Publications were identified by a search of eight electronic databases for relevant terms between 1984 and 2021. Patient characteristics and preoperative values including manifest refractive spherical refractive equivalent (MRSE), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior keratometry, postoperative residual stromal bed (RSB), and percent tissue altered (PTA) were summarized. In addition, annual rates of each refractive surgery were determined, and incidence of post-refractive ectasia for each type was calculated using the number of ectatic eyes identified in the literature.
RESULTS
In total, 57 eyes (70 eyes including those with preoperative risk factors for ectasia) were identified to have post-PRK ectasia, while 1453 eyes (1681 eyes including risk factors) had post-LASIK ectasia, and 11 eyes (19 eyes including risk factors) had post-SMILE ectasia. Cases of refractive surgery performed annually were estimated as 283,920 for PRK, 1,608,880 for LASIK, and 96,750 for SMILE. Reported post-refractive ectasia in eyes without preoperative identifiable risk factors occurred with the following incidences: 20 per 100,000 eyes in PRK, 90 per 100,000 eyes in LASIK, and 11 per 100,000 eyes in SMILE. The rate of ectasia in LASIK was found to be 4.5 times higher than that of PRK.
CONCLUSION
Post-refractive ectasia occurs at lower rates in eyes undergoing PRK than LASIK. Although SMILE appears to have the lowest rate of ectasia, the number of cases already reported since its recent approval suggests that post-SMILE ectasia may become a concern. Considering that keratoconus is a spectrum of disease, pre-existing keratoconus may play a larger role in postoperative ectasia than previously accounted for in the literature.
PubMed: 34417707
DOI: 10.1007/s40123-021-00383-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Refractive errors (conditions in which the eye fails to focus objects accurately on the retina due to defects in the refractive system), are the most common cause of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Refractive errors (conditions in which the eye fails to focus objects accurately on the retina due to defects in the refractive system), are the most common cause of visual impairment. Myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism are low-order aberrations, usually corrected with spectacles, contact lenses, or conventional refractive surgery. Higher-order aberrations (HOAs) can be quantified with wavefront aberration instruments and corrected using wavefront-guided or wavefront-optimized laser surgery. Wavefront-guided ablations are based on preoperative measurements of HOAs; wavefront-optimized ablations are designed to minimize induction of new HOAs while preserving naturally occurring aberrations. Two wavefront procedures are expected to produce better visual acuity than conventional procedures.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective was to compare effectiveness and safety of wavefront procedures, laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) versus corresponding conventional procedures, for correcting refractive errors in adults for postoperative uncorrected visual acuity, residual refractive errors, and residual HOAs. The secondary objective was to compare two wavefront procedures.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2019, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS); the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 6 August 2019. We imposed no restrictions by language or year of publication. We used the Science Citation Index (September 2013) and searched the reference lists of included trials to identify additional relevant trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing either wavefront modified with conventional refractive surgery or wavefront-optimized with wavefront-guided refractive surgery in participants aged ⪰ 18 years with refractive errors.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 33 RCTs conducted in Asia, Europe and United States, totaling 1499 participants (2797 eyes). Participants had refractive errors ranging from high myopia to low hyperopia. Studies reported at least one of the following review-specific outcomes based on proportions of eyes: with uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better, without loss of one or more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), within ± 0.50 diopters (D) of target refraction, with HOAs and adverse events. Study characteristics and risk of bias Participants were mostly women, mean age 29 and 53 years, and without previous refractive surgery, ocular pathology or systemic comorbidity. We could not judge risks of bias for most domains of most studies. Most studies in which both eyes of a participant were analyzed failed to account for correlations between two eyes in the analysis and reporting of outcomes. Findings For the primary comparison between wavefront (PRK or LASIK or LASEK) and corresponding conventional procedures, 12-month outcome data were available from only one study of PRK with 70 participants. No evidence of more favorable outcomes of wavefront PRK on proportion of eyes: with UCVA of 20/20 or better (risk ratio [RR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.24); without loss of one or more lines of BSCVA (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09); within ± 0.5 D of target refraction (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24); and mean spherical equivalent (mean difference [MD] 0.04, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.18). The evidence for each effect estimate was of low certainty. No study reported HOAs at 12 months. At six months, the findings of two to eight studies showed that overall effect estimates and estimates by subgroup of PRK or LASIK or LASEK were consistent with those for PRK at 12 month, and suggest no difference in all outcomes. The certainty of evidence for each outcome was low. For the comparison between wavefront-optimized and wavefront-guided procedures at 12 months, the overall effect estimates for proportion of eyes: with UCVA of 20/20 or better (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.02; 5 studies, 618 participants); without loss of one or more lines of BSCVA (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.02; I = 0%; 5 studies, 622 participants); within ± 0.5 diopters of target refraction (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09; I = 33%; 4 studies, 480 participants) and mean HOAs (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07; I = 41%; 5 studies, 622 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between the two groups. Owing to substantial heterogeneity, we did not calculate an overall effect estimate for mean spherical equivalent at 12 months, but point estimates consistently suggested no difference between wavefront-optimized PRK versus wavefront-guided PRK. However, wavefront-optimized LASIK compared with wavefront-guided LASIK may improve mean spherical equivalent (MD -0.14 D, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.09; 4 studies, 472 participants). All effect estimates were of low certainty of evidence. At six months, the results were consistent with those at 12 months based on two to six studies. The findings suggest no difference between two wavefront procedures for any of the outcomes assessed, except for the subgroup of wavefront-optimized LASIK which showed probable improvement in mean spherical equivalent (MD -0.12 D, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.05; I = 0%; 3 studies, 280 participants; low certainty of evidence) relative to wavefront-guided LASIK. We found a single study comparing wavefront-guided LASIK versus wavefront-guided PRK at six and 12 months. At both time points, effect estimates consistently supported no difference between two procedures. The certain of evidence was very low for all estimates. Adverse events Significant visual loss or optical side effects that were reported were similar between groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that at 12 months and six months postoperatively, there was no important difference between wavefront versus conventional refractive surgery or between wavefront-optimized versus wavefront-guided surgery in the clinical outcomes analyzed. The low certainty of the cumulative evidence reported to date suggests that further randomized comparisons of these surgical approaches would provide more precise estimates of effects but are unlikely to modify our conclusions. Future trials may elect to focus on participant-reported outcomes such as satisfaction with vision before and after surgery and effects of remaining visual aberrations, in addition to contrast sensitivity and clinical outcomes analyzed in this review.
Topics: Adult; Astigmatism; Corneal Wavefront Aberration; Female; Humans; Hyperopia; Keratectomy, Subepithelial, Laser-Assisted; Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ; Lasers, Excimer; Male; Middle Aged; Myopia; Photorefractive Keratectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33336797
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012687.pub2 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Sep 2021To evaluate the anti-haze effect and visual outcome after intraoperative mitomycin C (MMC) use during photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in myopia or myopic astigmatism... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the anti-haze effect and visual outcome after intraoperative mitomycin C (MMC) use during photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) in myopia or myopic astigmatism patients.
METHODS
We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar comprehensively to obtain studies comparing the clinical effects after PRK with and without MMC published until February 2020. Meta-analysis of primary outcome (corneal haze rate) and secondary outcomes [predictability, efficacy, safety and corneal endothelial cell density (ECD)] were conducted. We used trial sequential analysis (TSA) in an effort to collect firm evidence supporting our conclusion.
RESULTS
Of the included 11 randomized controlled trials, five cohort and one case-control studies, 3536 eyes (2232 and 1304 in the MMC and control groups, respectively) were enrolled for meta-analysis. The TSA disclosed strong evidence of decline in corneal haze rate in the MMC group compared with that of the control group. In the subgroup analysis of duration, MMC seemed to reduce corneal haze rate in early-onset and late-onset haze. Predictability of refraction and visual acuity were greater in the MMC groups, not significantly though. The proportion of patients losing at least two lines of best corrected visual acuity postoperatively in the MMC groups was lower than that in the control groups. The corneal postoperative ECD showed no significant difference between the MMC and control groups.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis revealed that MMC is an important anti-haze agent in PRK for reducing both early- and late-onset haze and can also help improving predictability of refraction and subjective postoperative visual acuity.
Topics: Corneal Opacity; Cross-Linking Reagents; Humans; Mitomycin; Myopia; Photorefractive Keratectomy; Postoperative Complications; Refraction, Ocular; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33326173
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14704