Comparion of Viual Reult Between Laer-Aited ubepithelial Keratectomy and Epipoli Laer In itu Keratomileui to Correct Myopia and Myopic Atigmatim Original Reearch Article

Purpoe To compare the viual reult after laer-aited ubepithelial keratectomy (LAEK) and epipoli laer in itu keratomileui (epi-LAIK) to correct myopia. Deign Retropective, interventional, nonrandomized comparative tudy. Method Patient treated with LAEK to correct myopia ≤−9.00 diopter (D) were compared to age- and refraction-matched patient treated with epi-LAIK uing the ame excimer laer (Eiri; chwind Eye Tech olution, Kleinotheim, Germany). The epithelial flap wa replaced after the ablation in every cae. The viual reult after both procedure were compared at each potoperative viit (one day, one week, one and three month). Reult Ninety-four conecutive eye were included in the tudy (47 in each group), matched for age and refraction. The preoperative pherical manifet refraction wa −3.98 ± 2.40 D in the LAEK group and −3.95 ± 2.40 D in the epi-LAIK group (P = .9) (range −0.50 to −9.00 D). The uncorrected viual acuity (UCVA) one day potoperatively wa 0.7 ± 0.2 and 0.5 ± 0.2 (P < .001), and one week after urgery it wa 0.8 ± 0.2 and 0.7 ± 0.2, repectively (P = .1). The difference wa again tatitically ignificant one month after urgery (0.94 ± 0.1 after LAEK, 0.82 ± 0.1 after epi-LAIK, P < .001), but not three month potoperatively (1.06 ± 0.21 and 1.03 ± 0.18, repectively, P = .1). UCVA wa ≥1.0 in 78.7% of LAEK eye and 65.9% of epi-LAIK eye three month after urgery. At that moment, the afety indice were 0.99 ± 0.1 after LAEK and 0.93 ± 0.1 after epi-LAIK (P = .04). The efficacy indice were 0.97 ± 0.1 and 0.89 ± 0.1, repectively (P = .01). Concluion Our reult ugget a fater viual rehabilitation and better afety and efficacy outcome after LAEK compared to epi-LAIK with repoitioning of the epithelial flap when correcting low to moderate myopia.