Excimer laser refractive surgery : corneal wound healing and clinical results

Although the first procedure in a seeing human eye using excimer laser was reported in 1988 (McDonald et al. 1989, O'Connor et al. 2006) just three studies (Kymionis et al. 2007, O'Connor et al. 2006, Rajan et al. 2004) with a follow-up over ten years had been published when this thesis was started. The present thesis aims to investigate 1) the long-term outcomes of excimer laser refractive surgery performed for myopia and/or astigmatism by photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser-in situ- keratomileusis (LASIK), 2) the possible differences in postoperative outcomes and complications when moderate-to-high astigmatism is treated with PRK or LASIK, 3) the presence of irregular astigmatism that depend exclusively on the corneal epithelium, and 4) the role of corneal nerve recovery in corneal wound healing in PRK enhancement. Our results revealed that in long-term the number of eyes that achieved uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA)≤0.0 and ≤0.5 (logMAR) was higher after PRK than after LASIK. Postoperative stability was slightly better after PRK than after LASIK. In LASIK treated eyes the incidence of myopic regression was more pronounced when the intended correction was over >6.0 D and in patients aged <30 years.Yet the intended corrections in our study were higher for LASIK than for PRK eyes. No differences were found in percentages of eyes with best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) or loss of two or more lines of visual acuity between PRK and LASIK in the long-term. The postoperative long-term outcomes of PRK with two different delivery systems broad beam and scanning laser were compared and revealed no differences. Postoperative outcomes of moderate-to-high astigmatism yielded better results in terms of UCVA and less compromise or loss of two more lines of BCVA after LASIK that after PRK.Similar stability for both procedures was revealed. Vector analysis showed that LASIK outcomes tended to be more accurate than PRK outcomes, yet no statistically differences were found. Irregular astigmatism secondary to recurrent corneal erosion due to map-dot-fingerprint was successfully treated with phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK). Preoperative videokeratographies (VK) showed irregular astigmatism. However, postoperatively, all eyes showed a regular pattern. No correlation was found between pre- and postoperative VK patterns. Postoperative outcomes of late PRK in eyes originally subjected to LASIK showed that all (7/7) eyes achieved UCVA ≤0.5 at last follow-up (range 3 — 11 months), and no eye lost lines of BCVA. Postoperatively all eyes developed and initial mild haze (0.5 — 1) into the first month. Yet, at last follow-up 5/7 eyes showed a haze of 0.5 and this was no longer evident in 2/7 eyes. Based on these results, we demonstrated that the long-term outcomes after PRK and LASIK were safe and efficient, with similar stability for both procedures. The PRK outcomes were similar when treated by broad-beam or scanning slit laser. LASIK was better than PRK to correct moderate-to-high astigmatism, yet both procedures showed a tendency of undercorrection. Irregular astigmatism was proven to be able to depend exclusively from the corneal epithelium. If this kind of astigmatism is present in the cornea and a customized PRK/LASIK correction is done based on wavefront measurements an irregular astigmatism may be produced rather than treated. Corneal sensory nerve recovery should have an important role in the modulation of the corneal wound healing and post-operative anterior stromal scarring. PRK enhancement may be an option in eyes with previous LASIK after a sufficient time interval that in at least 2 years.