Epi-LASIK e PRK: um ano de estudo comparativo em olhos contralaterais

dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorCRESTANA, Francisco Penteado
dc.contributor.authorBECHARA, Samir Jacob
dc.contributor.authorBLASBALG, Fabiana Tambasco
dc.contributor.authorNETTO, Marcelo Vieira
dc.contributor.authorMUKAI, Adriana
dc.date.accessioned2014-01-28T22:30:01Z
dc.date.available2014-01-28T22:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.description.abstractObjective: Compare PRK and Epi-LASIK techniques regarding postoperative visual recovery and symptoms. Methods: Interventional case series study including 38 eyes of 19 patients with myopia up to 5DE and astigmatism up to 1DC. Study included patients with similar refractive errors to be submitted to PRK in one eye and Epi-LASIK in the fellow eye at the same time. Follow-up was 1 year and included refractive error analysis and postoperative discomfort. Results: During the first 12 hours after surgery, 79% (P=0,0003) of patients reported more pain and discomfort in the eye submitted to Epi-LASIK. Twenty-four hours after surgery 63,2% (P=0,012) of patients still referred more pain in the eye submitted to Epi-LASIK and only 10,5% in the contralateral eye. Uncorrected visual acuity was better on the PRK group at the 1(th) day (p=0.034). No difference was observed at the other postoperative days after surgery. Postoperative corneal haze 0,5 (Fantes) was observed in three eyes of the PRK group and in two days of the Epi-LASIK group. Conclusion: Both groups presented good visual refractive results, but the Epi-LASIK group presented more discomfort immediately after surgery.
dc.description.abstractOBJETIVO: Comparar as técnicas de PRK e Epi-LASIK com relação à recuperação visual e sintomatologia pós-operatória. MÉTODOS: Série de casos intervencionista que incluiu 38 olhos de 19 pacientes com miopia até 5DE e astigmatismo até 1DC. Foram selecionados pacientes com erros refracionais semelhantes nos dois olhos, realizando-se, no mesmo tempo cirúrgico, PRK em um olho e Epi-LASIK no olho contralateral. Os pacientes foram acompanhados por um ano, avaliando-se a eficácia refracional e grau de desconforto pós-operatório. RESULTADOS: Durante as primeiras 12 horas, 79,9% dos pacientes (p=0,0003) referiram dor mais intensa no olho operado com a técnica Epi-LASIK. Após 24 horas, 63,2% dos pacientes (p=0,012) ainda referiam mais dor neste olho e apenas 10,5% no olho contralateral. A acuidade visual não corrigida foi melhor nos olhos do grupo PRK no primeiro dia (p=0,034). Nos demais dias não houve diferença significativa entre os grupos. Houveopacidade corneana grau 0,5 (Fantes) em três olhos do grupo PRK e em dois no grupo Epi-LASIK. CONCLUSÃO: Ambos os grupos apresentaram resultado visual refracional satisfatório, porém o grupo Epi-LASIK apresentou maior desconforto no pós-operatório imediato
dc.description.indexPubMed
dc.identifier.citationREVISTA BRASILEIRA DE OFTALMOLOGIA, v.72, n.4, p.219-222, 2013
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/S0034-72802013000400002
dc.identifier.issn0034-7280
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/4403
dc.language.isopor
dc.publisherSOC BRASILEIRA OFTALMOLOGIA
dc.relation.ispartofRevista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.holderCopyright SOC BRASILEIRA OFTALMOLOGIA
dc.subjectVisual acuity
dc.subjectPain
dc.subjectTreatment outcome
dc.subjectAstigmatism
dc.subjectCeratectomia fotorrefrativa
dc.subjectAcuidade visual
dc.subjectDor
dc.subjectResultado de tratamento
dc.subjectMiopia
dc.subjectAstigmatismo
dc.subject.otherphotorefractive keratectomy
dc.subject.othermyopia
dc.subject.wosOphthalmology
dc.titleEpi-LASIK e PRK: um ano de estudo comparativo em olhos contralaterais
dc.title.alternativeEpi-LASIK e PRK: one-year comparative study on contralateral eyes
dc.typearticle
dc.type.categoryoriginal article
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dspace.entity.typePublication
hcfmusp.author.externalBLASBALG, Fabiana Tambasco:Univ Sao Paulo, Setor Cirurg Refrat, Disciplina Oftalmol, Hosp Clin,Fac Med, Sao Paulo, Brazil
hcfmusp.citation.scopus0
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcFRANCISCO PENTEADO CRESTANA
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcSAMIR JACOB BECHARA
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcMARCELO VIEIRA NETTO
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcADRIANA MUKAI TOYOTA
hcfmusp.description.beginpage219
hcfmusp.description.endpage222
hcfmusp.description.issue4
hcfmusp.description.volume72
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.scieloSCIELO:S0034-72802013000400002
hcfmusp.origem.scopus2-s2.0-84888083225
hcfmusp.origem.wosWOS:000326674900002
hcfmusp.publisher.cityRIO DE JANEIRO
hcfmusp.publisher.countryBRAZIL
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCarones F, 2002, J CATARACT REFR SURG, V28, P2088, DOI 10.1016/S0886-3350(02)01701-7
hcfmusp.relation.referenceChen WL, 2008, INVEST OPHTH VIS SCI, V49, P2416, DOI 10.1167/iovs.07-1085
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDai JH, 2006, J REFRACT SURG, V22, P589
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEPSTEIN D, 1994, OPHTHALMOLOGY, V101, P1558
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEpstein D, 1994, OPHTHALMOLOGY, V101, P1563
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFANTES FE, 1990, ARCH OPHTHALMOL-CHIC, V108, P665
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFantes FE, 1991, ARCH OPHTHALMOL-CHIC, V109, P15
hcfmusp.relation.referenceIskander N G, 2000, Curr Opin Ophthalmol, V11, P273, DOI 10.1097/00055735-200008000-00009
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKalyvianaki MI, 2008, OPHTHALMOLOGY, V115, P2174, DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.08.025
hcfmusp.relation.referenceNetto MV, 2005, CORNEA, V24, P509, DOI 10.1097/01.ico.0000151544.23360.17
hcfmusp.relation.referenceO'Doherty M, 2007, J REFRACT SURG, V23, P133
hcfmusp.relation.referencePallikaris Ioannis G, 2003, Curr Opin Ophthalmol, V14, P207, DOI 10.1097/00055735-200308000-00007
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSandoval HP, 2005, J CATARACT REFR SURG, V31, P221, DOI 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.08.047
hcfmusp.relation.referenceShalaby Ashraf, 2009, J Refract Surg, V25, pS93
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTorres LF, 2007, J REFRACT SURG, V23, P126
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWong DL, 1997, WHALEY WONGS ESSENTI, P1301
hcfmusp.scopus.lastupdate2024-05-10
relation.isAuthorOfPublication65d2f634-2fd0-42e6-8468-97372e2a1271
relation.isAuthorOfPublication2308e6df-aa44-4754-89ff-a9a55bff02d1
relation.isAuthorOfPublication13304a2d-b16a-4bbf-99e8-b80003c8efe3
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationbc130d15-e7b6-41bd-a869-da8fd68804dc
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery2308e6df-aa44-4754-89ff-a9a55bff02d1
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
art_CRESTANA_Epi_LASIK_e_PRK_one_year_comparative_study_2013.PDF
Tamanho:
747.8 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
publishedVersion (Portuguese)