4.3 Article

Assessment of Corneal Haze After PRK and the Effect of Sutureless Amniotic Membrane Graft by Corneal Densitometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY
卷 36, 期 5, 页码 293-+

出版社

SLACK INC
DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20200406-01

关键词

-

资金

  1. Carl Zeiss Meditec
  2. TearSolutions, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To assess whether densitometry analysis appropriately monitors the development of haze in myopic patients after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) when compared to subjective slit-lamp haze grade examinations, and whether sutureless cryo-preserved amniotic membrane reduced postoperative haze development when compared to the standard bandage contact tens. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort at the Center for Refractive Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. In the prospective study, participants underwent PRK for myopia. Postoperatively, a standard bandage contact tens was applied to the dominant eye and a sutureless cryo-preserved amniotic membrane graft to the nondominant eye. Participants were evaluated at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively for haze formation and corneal densitometry using slit-lamp biomicroscopy and Scheimpftug imaging, respectively. RESULTS: Densitometry measurements at 6 months postoperatively were positively and significantly associated with the presence or absence of haze as assessed by slit-lamp examination in 39 patients (78 eyes; age range: 21 to 44 years). Eyes with increased densitometry measurements had 2.3 to 3.4 times the odds (P <= .014) of having clinical haze on slit-lamp examination. Eyes with the amniotic membrane graft showed a positive correlation with increased corneal. densitometry throughout most layers of the cornea. CONCLUSIONS: Densitometry analysis appears to be a useful toot to supplement slit-tamp examination in monitoring haze development after PRK. The amniotic membrane failed to show a reduction in corneal. densitometry in myopic eyes after PRK.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据