论文部分内容阅读
Background It is unclear whether a laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) has any significant advantage over a photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for correcting myopia.We undertook this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to examine possible differences in efficacy,accuracy,safety and side-effects between two methods,LASEK and PRK,for correcting myopia.Methods A systematic literature retrieval was conducted in the PubMed,EMBASE,Chinese Bio-medicine Database,and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to identify potentially relevant randomized controlled trials.The statistical analysis was performed using a RevMan 4.2 software.The results included efficacy outcomes (proportion of eyes with uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA)≥ 20/20 at 1 month and 12 months post-treatment),accuracy outcomes (proportion of eyes within ±0.50 diopters (D) of target refraction at 1 month and 12 months post-treatment),safety outcomes (loss of ≥2 lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at ≥ 6 months post-treatment),mean pain scores on day 1 post-treatment,and mean ceal haze scores at 6 and 12 months post-treatment.Results Seven articles describing a total of 604 eyes with myopia from 0 to -9.0 D were identified in this meta-analysis.The combined results showed that the efficacy and accuracy outcomes between the two groups at 1 month and 12 months post-treatment were comparable.No patient lost ≥ 2 lines of BSCVA at ≥ 6 months post-treatment in four relevant trials.Compared with PRK,LASEK did not relieve discomfort on day 1 post-treatment or reduce ceal haze intensity at 6 and 12 months post-treatment.Conclusions According to the available data,LASEK does not appear to have any advantage over PRK for correcting myopia from 0 to -9.0 D.This meta-analysis focuses mainly on the comparison of the early,mid-term and mid-long term results of the two methods.Additional studies to compare the long-term (＞one year) results should be considered.