准分子激光上皮下角膜磨镶术和准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术在屈光回退再治疗的疗效观察

目的比较准份子激光上皮瓣下角膜磨镶术（LASEK）和准分子原位角膜磨镶术（LASIK）在屈光回退再治疗的安全性、有效性和可预测性。方法回顾性分析8例（12只眼）LASEK（A组）和15例（23只眼）LASIK（B组）在术后屈光回退、欠矫再次手术病例。A组采用酒精浸泡保留上皮瓣的方法;B组采用原瓣掀起或再次重新制瓣的方法。结果术后1个月A组眼视力≥0.8者9只眼（占75%）,B组≥0.8者2只眼（87%）,等效球镜屈光度＋1.0～-1.25D之间。B组有1只眼重新制瓣时出现角膜瓣错位,第3次手术行LASEK裸眼视力达到1.0。结论LASEK和LASIK在术后屈光回退、欠矫再治疗是安全有效的。LASIK术后恢复快,层间反应轻,稳定性好,优于LASEK,而LASIK在角膜薄、初次手术瓣异常、高度近视再次手术等选择上优于LASIK。两种手术方法在远期疗效和术后并发症等仍需更长期的观察。     

准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术后的二次手术

目的 探讨准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK)后行二次LASIK手术和准分子激光上皮下角膜磨镶术(LASEK)的临床效果.方法 回顾性病历对照研究.对31例(62只眼)LASIK术后欠矫或屈光回退的患者行二次手术.其中A组(30眼)的病例行LASIK手术,B组(32眼)行LASEK手术,随访观察1年.主要观察指标有:视力、屈光度、角膜曲率、总高阶像差值.对数据采用非配对t检验进行统计学分析.结果 二次手术后1周,A、B组裸眼视力分别为(0.79±0.21)及(0.57±0.11),差异有统计学意义(t=5.21,P＜0.05).术后1个月和1年两组视力差异均无统计学意义(t=0.59,-0.60;P＞0.05).术后1年A、B两组裸眼视力分别为0.84±0.15和0.82±0.11、等效球镜屈光度分别为(-0.34±1.15)和(-0.32±1.13)D,平均角膜曲率分别为37.87±1.95和38.47±2.15,总高阶像差值分别为0.45±0.11和0.48±0.13,差异均无统计学意义(t=0.60,-0.07,-1.15,-0.98,P＞0.05).LASIK组发生1例角膜上皮内生,LASEK组有1例2+级haze.结论 LASIK术后二次手术采用LASEK和LASIK均可获得满意的临床效果.但从患者的术后愈合时间早期反应及最终结果来看,LASIK术后二次手术采用LASIK应该是比较恰当的选择,对于角膜基质床比较薄的患者采用LASEK方式作为候补方式也能取得较满意的临床效果.但用LASEK方式是否可以补矫更高的屈光度仍有待观察.     

准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术与准分子激光角膜上皮瓣下磨镶术后角膜知觉恢复的研究

目的 比较准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术（LASIK）和准分子激光角膜上皮瓣下磨镶术（LASEK）后角膜知觉的恢复情况。方法 本研究观察在我院行LASIK或LASEK近视矫正的患者59例（59只眼）,包括低、中度近视行LASEK者20只眼,高度近视行LASEK者30只眼,以及低、中度近视行LASIK者9只眼。分别在术前、术后2周、1、3、6个月时测量角膜中央知觉,并和切削深度进行相关性检验。结果 LASIK和LASEK术后角膜知觉均下降,但LASIK术后下降更明显。在各观察时间点,LASEK术后的角膜知觉均好于LASIK术后2周、1个月和3个月时差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．01）,6个月时P=0．031。低、中度近视LASIK术后6个月时角膜知觉仍未恢复（P=0．023）;而LASEK术后3个月时角膜知觉已恢复（P〉0．05）。高度近视LASEK术后6个月时角膜知觉基本恢复（P〉0．05）。LASEK术后1、3及6个月的角膜知觉和切削深度有相关性（r=0．419,0．433,0．413;P〈0．05）,其余观察时间点两者无相关性。LASIK术后各时间点的角膜知觉和切削深度无相关性（P〉0．05）。结论 LASEK术后角膜知觉的恢复较LASIK术后快,LASEK术后角膜知觉的恢复和切削深度有关。     

自制角膜上皮瓣成形器在准分子激光上皮下角膜磨镶术中的应用

目的 :探讨自制角膜上皮瓣成形器在准分子激光上皮瓣下角膜磨镶术 (LASEK)治疗近视中的临床效果。方法 :选择不能采用准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术 (LASIK)方法治疗的近视眼患者 15 6例 310眼 ,用LASEK进行治疗 ,随访 6个月。结果 :术后刺激症状较LASIK明显 ,术后 6个月 30 5眼 (占 98.39% )的患者裸眼视力达到其最佳矫正视力 ,5眼出现 2级haze ,影响视力。结论 :该方法安全性高 ,治疗范围广 ,手术设备成本低 ,术后视觉质量明显优于LASIK ,是一种值得推广的新方法。     

激光上皮下角膜磨镶术和激光原位角膜磨镶术治疗高度近视远期疗效的比较

目的:研究激光上皮下角膜磨镶术(laser epithelial kerato-mileusis,LASEK)治疗高度近视的远期对比敏感度的改变,并评价LASEK手术治疗高度近视的安全性及有效性。方法:回顾性分析比较激光上皮下角膜磨镶术和激光原位角膜磨镶术(laser in situ keratomileusis,LASIK)治疗高度近视各30眼的临床资料,LASEK和LASIK均采用美国博士伦217型准分子激光治疗仪进行激光切削,术后随访3mo,对术后haze、屈光状态和对比敏感度进行分析比较。所有患者年龄分布在18～30岁,术前最佳矫正视力均≥0.8,所有病例均无其他任何影响对比敏感度的眼疾,亦无其它可能会影响对比敏感度的全身性疾病。结果:比较术后3mo时LASEK和LASIK两组的haze发生率,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。两组术后的屈光度值,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。两组术后各空间频率的对比敏感度,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论:LASEK治疗高度近视的远期疗效与LASIK基本一致,但LASEK较LASIK更为安全可靠。     

准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术治疗高度近视

目的评价准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术治疗高度近视的疗效。方法采用LASIK治疗高度近视186例308眼,按术前屈光度将患者分为2组。对1a随访结果进行统计分析。结果A组术前近视-6.0～-10.0D(等值球镜,下同)术后1a裸眼视力达到0.5和1.0者分别为95.76%和77.58%,剩余屈光度为-0.32D±0.46D。B组术前近视-10.25～-20.00D,术后1a裸眼视力达0.5和1.0者分别为62.24%和37.06%.剩余屈光度-0.92D±1.13D。结论LASIK治疗高度近视安全有效,并有较好的预测性和稳定性。     

准分子原位角膜磨镶术后再近视的准分子激光上皮下角膜磨镶术治疗

目的探讨准分子激光上皮下角膜磨镶术(lasersubepithelial keratomileusis,LASEK)治疗准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(excimer laser in situ keratomileusis,LASIK)后再近视的疗效及安全性。方法对21例(36眼)LASIK后再近视患者施行LASEK。LASEK术前的平均屈光度为(-1.98±0.65)D,平均角膜瓣下剩余基质厚度为(256±18.46)μm,LASEK平均切削深度为(36.58±11.24)μm。结果术后第6个月时裸眼视力为1.0以上者22眼(占61.1%),0.8以上者31眼(占86.1%),0.5以上者36眼(占100%),平均屈光度为(-0.18±0.53)D,未见最佳矫正视力下降,术后裸眼视力较术前明显提高,差异有显著性(P<0.05)。角膜瓣haze 0级者29眼(占80.6%),0.5级者5眼(占13.9%),1级者2眼(占5.6%)。结论LASEK治疗LASIK后再近视安全有效,但更长期的效果有待继续随访。     

准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术和准分子激光上皮下磨镶术矫正高度近视的视觉质量对比研究

目的 从视觉质量的角度评价准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术（LASIK）和准分子激光上皮下磨镶术（LASEK）矫正高度近视的疗效。方法对34人（68眼）进行LASIK或LASEK手术的高度近视患者（其中LASEK19人38眼，LASIK组15人30眼）术前，术后1月和术后3月时评价视觉质量，包括术后裸眼视力（UCVA），最佳矫正视组（BCVA组），对比敏感度，眩光和波前像差。结果 LASEK组UCVA提高较LASIK组慢。LASEK和LASIK的术后IN2VA无差异。LASEK组术后的对比敏感度无下降；眩光在术后1月时下降，术后3月时恢复至术前水平。LASIK组术后1月时对比敏感度和眩光均明显下降，术后3月时对比敏感度恢复但眩光仍未恢复至术前水平。LASEK组和LASIK组术后1月和3月的高阶像差RMS均较术前大，但前者比后者小。LASEK组有一定的haze发生，但程度轻。结论 LASEK矫正高度近视能获得更好的视觉质量，关键在于如何更好的保留上皮瓣的活力。     

准分子激光上皮瓣下角膜磨镶术矫治超高度近视的临床研究

目的探讨准分子激光上皮瓣下角膜磨镶术(LASEK)矫治超高度近视的疗效与安全性。方法应用德国Zeiss MEL 80准分子激光器对-10.00以上的超高度近视22例(40眼)施行LASEK术,术前平均裸眼视力0.02±0.02 (0.01～0.05),平均等效球镜(-12.75±2.30)D。随访6个月,观察术后症状、裸眼视力和最佳矫正视力、显然屈光度、眼压、角膜愈合程度和并发症。结果LASEK术后角膜上皮愈合时间1～4d。6个月裸眼视力≥0.5者占95%,裸眼视力≥1.0者占27.5%。平均裸眼视力0.70±0.20,平均等效球镜(-1.25±1.78)D。haze发生14眼(35.0%),haze 0.5级10眼(25.0%),haze 1.0级4眼(10.0%)。5例出现眩光。结论LASEK术可以安全有效地进行超高度近视的矫治,可作为超高度近视治疗的一种较好选择。     

准分子激光双面式原位与上皮瓣下角膜磨镶术治疗高度近视评价

目的 比较准分子激光双面式切削原位角膜磨镶术(Both-sideLasik,BSL)和准分子激光角膜上皮瓣下磨镶术(LASEK)治疗薄角膜高度近视的临床效果,两种手术方法的优缺点.方法 应用BSL和LASEK治疗近视度>-8.00D,角膜厚度471～546μm的患者.BSL组45例51只眼,近视球镜度数为-8.25～-13.25D,平均-9.71D.LASEK组39例67只眼,近视球镜度数-8.25～-12.75D,平均-926D.分别于术后10d、1、3、6、12个月检查裸眼视力,矫正视力,屈光度和角膜雾样混浊(Haze)等,并进行比较.结果 BSL组术后反应轻,裸眼视力恢复快,术后10d、1、3、6、12个月裸眼视力达到术前最佳矫正视力的比例,BSL组分别为为72.55%、80.39%、84.31%1.31%、78.43%和68.63%,LASEK组分别为47.76%、65.67%、71.64%、70.15%和61.19%,未出现矫正视力下降2行及以上者.两组屈光度均由手术早期的过矫逐渐转变为后期的欠矫,LASEK组发生Haze的比例明显高于BSL组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),但多为0.5～1级Haze,术中、术后无严重并发症.结论 准分子激光双面式切削原位角膜磨镶术治疗薄角膜高度近视安全、有效,与LASEK相比,其角膜雾样混浊发生率更低,且程度轻,视力恢复更快.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis versus laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy for the correction of high myopia

PURPOSE: To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) in the treatment of high myopia. SETTING: Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, and Balgeunsesang Ophthalmology Clinic, Seoul, South Korea. METHODS: Four hundred seventy eyes of 240 patients with manifest refraction spherical components greater than -6.00 diopters (D) were assigned to 2 groups: 324 eyes (167 patients) were treated with LASIK and 146 eyes (73 patients), with LASEK. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), remaining refractive error, corneal haze, and complications were followed in both groups for 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, the mean spherical equivalent (SE) was within +/-0.50 D of emmetropia in 205 eyes (63.3%) in the LASIK group and 81 eyes (55.5%) in the LASEK group and within +/-1.00 D in 261 eyes (80.6%) and 104 eyes (71.2%), respectively. The UCVA was 20/25 or better in 269 LASIK eyes (83.0%) and 111 LASEK eyes (76.0%). There was more than a 1-line loss of BSCVA in 4 LASIK eyes (1.2%) and 21 LASEK eyes (14.3%). The between-group differences in SE, magnitude of cylinder, UCVA, and haze were statistically significant (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both LASIK and LASEK were safe and effectively treated eyes with high myopia. Laser in situ keratomileusis provided superior results in visual predictability and corneal opacity.     

Prospective, paired comparison of laser in situ keratomileusis and laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia less than -6.00 diopters

PURPOSE: To compare visual and refractive results, contrast sensitivity, and tear stability after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in one eye and laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) in the fellow eye for low myopia. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with low myopia, with a maximum difference of 1 D between their two eyes, were randomly assigned to receive LASEK on one eye and LASIK on the other eye. A total of 64 eyes of 32 patients with a mean age of 26.83 +/- 5.33 years were included in the study. Preoperative myopia ranged from -1.00 to -6.00 D. Follow-up was 6 to 12 months. Uncorrected (UCVA) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), Schirmer test results, tear break-up time, corneal asphericity, corneal uniformity index, predicted corneal acuity, and contrast sensitivity values were compared with preoperative values. A Wilcoxon test was used for statistical comparisons and a P-value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: At 6 months after surgery, there was no statistically significant difference in UCVA, BSCVA, spherical and cylindrical refractive error, Schirmer test, or tear break-up time between groups. Contrast sensitivity values in the LASIK eyes were lower in comparison to preoperative values, but there was no change in the LASEK group. CONCLUSIONS: Based on 6-month results, LASEK for low myopia was safe and effective with predictable results, offered early refractive stability, and may be considered an alternative for LASIK.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis for myopic astigmatism with the Nidek EC-5000 laser

PURPOSE: We studied the efficacy, predictability, and safety of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for moderate to high simple and compound myopic astigmatism. METHODS: Ninety-two eyes of 46 consecutive patients who had LASIK for myopic astigmatism (64 eyes, astigmatism 3.00 to 9.00 D; myopia 0 to -20.00 D), or simple myopia (28 eyes, myopia -4.00 to -20.00 D; astigmatism 0 to 0.50 D) were retrospectively studied. Mean baseline spherical equivalent refraction (SE) in the myopia group was -8.11 +/- 3.94 D and in the astigmatism group, -8.55 +/- 4.49 D. All eyes underwent LASIK using the Nidek EC-5000 laser by the same surgeon. RESULTS: At 6 months after LASIK in the myopia group versus the astigmatism group, 24 eyes (85%) vs. 54 eyes (84%) were available for follow-up, 12 eyes (50%) vs. 13 eyes (24%) had uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20, 19 eyes (79%) vs. 44 eyes (81%) had UCVA of 20/40, 8 eyes (33%) vs. 18 eyes (33%) had SE within +/- 0.50 D, 15 eyes (62%) vs. 39 eyes (72%) had SE within +/- 1.00 D, and mean SE was -1.22 +/- 1.17 D vs. -0.74 +/- 1.46 D. Mean astigmatism (vertexed to the corneal plane) in the astigmatism group was 2.77 D at 0 degrees before surgery and 0.32 D at 7 degrees at 6 months. None of the myopic eyes and three of the astigmatic eyes (5%) lost > or = 2 lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. CONCLUSION: LASIK with the Nidek EC-5000 laser for myopic astigmatism was reasonably effective, predictable, and safe. Astigmatism was under-corrected with the nomogram implemented in this study.     

Comparison of laser epithelial keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for low to moderate myopia

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness, safety, and stability of laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK), a modified photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) technique, with those of conventional PRK for low to moderate myopia. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. METHODS: In this prospective study, 27 patients with a manifest refraction of -3.00 to -6.50 diopters were treated and followed for 3 months. In each case, PRK was performed in 1 eye and LASEK in the other eye. The first eye treated and the surgical method used in the first eye were randomized. Postoperative pain, epithelial healing time, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), manifest refraction, corneal haze, and surgical preference were examined in PRK- and LASEK-treated eyes. RESULTS: During the 3 month follow-up, there were no significant between-eye differences in epithelial healing time, UCVA, or refractive error. However, LASEK-treated eyes had lower postoperative pain scores (P =.047) and corneal haze scores (1 month; P =.02) than PRK-treated eyes. Seventeen patients (63%) preferred the LASEK procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Laser epithelial keratomileusis safely and effectively treated eyes with low to moderate myopia. It reduced the incidence of significant postoperative pain and corneal haze and may prevent the flap- and interface-related problems of laser in situ keratomileusis.     

A control-matched comparison of laser epithelial keratomileusis and laser in situ keratomileusis for low to moderate myopia

PURPOSE: To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for the treatment of low to moderate myopia. DESIGN: Retrospective, nonrandomized, control-matched study. METHODS: The charts of 2257 eyes that underwent LASEK or LASIK treatment were reviewed. Patients who were 21 years of age or older having between -0.75 and -6.00 diopters (D) of myopia with up to -2.25 D of astigmatism were included. One hundred twenty-two LASEK-treated eyes were matched with 122 LASIK-treated eyes having preoperative spheres, cylinders, and spherical equivalent (SE) within +/-0.50 D. Both groups had similar preoperative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), laser platform, and follow-up durations. Outcome measures were visual and refractive results. RESULTS: Preoperatively, the mean SE was -3.50 +/- 1.40 D for LASEK and -3.50 +/- 1.42 D for LASIK (P = .59). Postoperatively, the mean logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 0.01 +/- 0.08 (20/21) for LASEK and 0.06 +/- 0.12 (20/23) for LASIK; the mean SE was -0.15 +/- 0.40 D for LASEK and -0.37 +/- 0.45 D for LASIK; and the mean logMAR of BSCVA was -0.03 +/- 0.06 (20/19) for LASEK and -0.02 +/- 0.05 (20/19) for LASIK. No eye lost 2 or more lines of BSCVA in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Slight differences in the visual and refractive results between LASEK and LASIK were observed, despite the use of the same nomogram. Both procedures were safe, effective, and predictable. Nomogram adjustment may be necessary for LASIK surgeons adopting surface ablation.     

Laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia with the autonomous laser

PURPOSE: To describe the refractive outcome, objective clinical data, and subjective patient experiences after laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. METHODS: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of 58 LASEK-treated eyes (36 patients) with myopia (with and without astigmatism) between -1.50 and -14.75 D (mean -7.80 +/- 2.90 D, median -7.90 D). Refractive surgery was performed using the Alcon Summit Autonomous LADAR Vision excimer laser. Manifest refraction, best-spectacle and uncorrected Snellen visual acuity, stability of refraction, and corneal haze were evaluated before surgery and up to 6 months after surgery. A group of randomly selected LASIK-treated eyes were compared at each time point. RESULTS: Patients who opted for monovision (n=12) were excluded. In the emmetropia targeted eyes (n=46), 45%, 83%, 85%, and 89% achieved 20/40 or better uncorrected Snellen visual acuity (UCVA) at 1 day, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 1 month respectively. At 6 months, 73% (n=28) of eyes treated achieved UCVA 20/20 with 97% achieving 20/40 or better (mean, -0.51 D). At 3 and 6 months, 71% (n=46) and 68% (n=28) were within +/- 0.50 D of emmetropia. The percentage of eyes that achieved UCVA 20/40 or better at 6 months was 97% (n=28). Visually significant corneal haze was evident in two LASEK-treated patients (four eyes) at 6 months. No eyes lost two or more lines of best spectacle-corrected Snellen visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggest that LASEK appears to be a safe, effective, and comparable alternative to LASIK, even for higher amounts of myopia. A prospective, randomized clinical trial is needed to better define the role of LASEK as it compares to other refractive procedures, specifically LASIK and PRK.     

Laser in situ keratomileusis versus surface ablation: visual outcomes and complications

PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes and complications of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with those of surface treatment by laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK), photorefractive keratectomy with mechanical epithelial removal (M-PRK), and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (T-PRK). SETTING: Tertiary care eye center. METHODS: This retrospective review comprised all cases of LASIK, LASEK, M-PRK, and T-PRK performed at King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital between July 1, 2004, and June 30, 2005. Separate statistical analyses were performed for eyes with low to moderate myopia (spherical equivalent [SE] less than -6.00 diopters [D]) and high myopia (SE -6.00 to -11.25 D). RESULTS: Of 696 eyes that met the inclusion criteria, 464 had LASIK, 104 had LASEK, 69 had M-PRK, and 59 had T-PRK. Eyes with low to moderate myopia had a statistically significantly smaller mean difference between logMAR final postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and preoperative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) after T-PRK and M-PRK than after LASIK or LASEK. A higher percentage of eyes with high myopia had a final UCVA within +/-2 lines of the preoperative BSCVA with T-PRK than with LASIK, LASEK, or M-PRK. There were more major non-flap-related complications after LASEK than after LASIK, M-PRK, or T-PRK. CONCLUSIONS: In eyes with low to moderate myopia, T-PRK and M-PRK provided slightly better visual outcomes than LASIK or LASEK. In eyes with high myopia, T-PRK provided better visual outcomes than LASIK, LASEK, and M-PRK. Laser in situ keratomileusis was associated with the most major postoperative complications.     

Laser subepithelial keratomileusis for myopia of -6 to -10 diopters with astigmatism with the MEL60 laser

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, predictability, and safety of laser subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) for treatment of high myopia with astigmatism. METHODS: LASEK was performed in 61 eyes of 36 consecutive patients with myopic spherical equivalent refraction of -6.00 to -10.00 D using the Aesculap-Meditec MEL60 excimer laser. Data were collected prospectively with a follow-up of 6 to 17 months. Main outcome measures recorded were UCVA, BSCVA, residual refractive error, corneal haze, and complications. RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of eyes achieved 20/40 or better UCVA at 1 month. At 12 months, 64% of eyes achieved 20/20 and 92% achieved 20/40 or better UCVA. Two eyes lost 2 lines of BSCVA at 6 or 12 months. Accuracy of correction was +/- 0.50 D from emmetropia in 82% of eyes, and +/- 1.00 D in 90% at 12 months. No eye showed more than grade 1 haze. Grade 1 haze was observed in three eyes at 12 months. One patient had mild postoperative keratitis, which was successfully treated. CONCLUSIONS: LASEK with the Aesculap-Meditec MEL60 excimer laser appeared to be safe, effective, and highly predictable in treating high myopia.     

Effectiveness of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy to treat residual refractive errors after laser in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) to treat residual refractive errors after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTINGS: Isik Eye Clinic, Ankara, Turkey. METHODS: This retrospective study included 24 eyes of 15 patients who had retreatment by LASEK for residual refractive errors after myopic LASIK. All patients had examinations that included slitlamp biomicroscopy, subjective and cycloplegic refractions, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity, corneal topography, and pachymetry preoperatively and postoperatively. Postoperative examinations were performed at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months. RESULTS: The patient cohort comprised 9 men and 6 women. The median spherical equivalent (SE) of attempted correction for retreatment with LASEK was -1.25 diopters (D). The median follow-up after LASEK was 11.5 months (range 6 to 16 months). At the end of the follow-up, the median SE of the refractive error was -0.38 D. The median UCVA increased from 20/45 before LASEK to 20/25 at the last follow-up visit, which was statistically significant (P<.001). After LASEK, significant postoperative haze developed in 5 eyes. In all 5 eyes, the estimated ablation depth was more than 40 mum and the SE of attempted correction was -2.00 D or greater. CONCLUSIONS: Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy retreatment in eyes with myopic regression after LASIK resulted in a significant improvement in UCVA that was comparable to the improvement after flap lifting. An SE of attempted correction greater than -2.00 D was associated with a significant rate of haze.