ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Quality of Vision After LASIK, PRK and FemtoLASIK: An Analysis Using the Double Pass Imaging System HD AnalyzerTM
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Analyze and compare the quality of vision of Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), LASER in situ keratomileusis with mechanical microkeratome (LASIK) and femtosecond-assisted LASIK (FS-LASIK) using the double-pass imaging system HD AnalyzerTM Setting: Ophthalmology department of Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto (CHUPorto). Design: Retrospective, non-randomized, single center study. Methods: Analysis of three equivalent groups of patients submitted to PRK, LASIK and FS-LASIK at our department. The objective quality of vision assessment included the objective scatter index (OSI), the modular transfer function cutoff frequency (MTF) and the predicted visual acuity within the 100% (PVA), 20% (PVA20) and 9% contrast levels (PVA9) that were evaluated at baseline, 1st week, 1 and 6 months after surgery. Results: 118 eyes were included: 40 underwent LASIK, 43 FS-LASIK and 35 PRK. The mean age was 30.6±4.6 years old and 56% were female. There was a significant impact concerning the type of procedure in the objective quality of vision analysis (Repeated measures ANOVA): the FS-LASIK group showed lower OSI values overtime [F(1,2)=4.566, p=0.012, OSI 0.83±0.53 (FS-LASIK) vs 0.87±0.47 (PRK) and 1.21±1.44 (LASIK)], higher MTF values [F(1,2)=6.569, p=0.002, MTF 40.17±8.33 vs 32.37±11.4 (PRK) and 30.26±10.28 (LASIK)], higher PVA 100% [F(1,2)=10.871, p<0.001], PVA 20% [F(1,2)=9.737, p<0.001] and PVA 9% [F(1,2)=6.335), p=0.003]. Conclusion: In our study, FS-LASIK showed an excellent optical performance through the HD AnalyzerTM technology, with significantly lower OSI and higher MTF, PVA100, PVA20 and PVA9 values. According to our results, this procedure seems to be superior to PRK and LASIK regarding visual quality objective parameters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.