Purpose To longitudinally compare the visual and refractive outcomes and changes in corneal thickness between femtosecond-assisted sub-Bowmen keratomileusis (SBK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) with mitomycin C in eyes with high myopia.
Methods Patients with spherical equivalent ≥6 dioptres (D) who underwent femtosecond-assisted SBK or PRK with mitomycin C were recruited. All patients were examined preoperatively and after 1 week, and, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Assessments included uncorrected and best-corrected distance visual acuity , and manifest refraction spherical equivalent. Corneal thickness was measured using swept source optical coherence tomography.
Results A total of 110 eyes were included (68 PRK, 42 SBK). Change in efficacy index and safety index was not significantly different between both groups beyond 1 week postoperatively (p≥0.116). Manifest refraction spherical equivalent changed significantly from −9.02±1.92 D preoperatively to −0.21±0.31 D and from −8.25±1.10 D preoperatively to −0.53±0.55 D at 1 year after PRK and SBK, respectively (p<0.0001). The variance of postoperative refraction was significantly smaller after PRK throughout the 1-year follow-up compared with SBK (p≤0.0024). The central corneal thickness stabilised at 1 week after PRK and 3 months after SBK.
Conclusions Our study showed that femtosecond-assisted SBK and PRK with mitomycin C have comparable safety and efficacy for correction of high myopia. However, better predictability of postoperative refraction was noted after PRK compared with SBK.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors All authors contributed to the conception and design, data acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data. All authors contributed to the drafting, revising and final approval of the current study. All authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval New Territories East Cluster Ethics Committee.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.