title: Myopia correction with transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy versus femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis: One-year case-matched analysis.
abstract: To compare the postoperative clinical outcomes of single-step transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).
  
  
  
  Bergman Clinics, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
  
  
  
  Retrospective case series.
  
  
  
  The eyes of consecutive patients who had transepithelial PRK were retrospectively compared with the same number of case-matched eyes (based on the preoperative refractive components) treated with femtosecond-assisted LASIK. The clinical outcomes evaluated were predictability, refractive outcomes, and visual acuity. The Student t test and chi-square test were used for statistical analysis.
  
  
  
  The study compared 98 patients (196 eyes) who had transepithelial PRK with the outcomes in 196 case-matched eyes that had femtosecond-assisted LASIK. All patients completed the 1-year follow-up. At 1 year, 130 eyes (66%) in the transepithelial PRK group and 91 eyes (46%) in the femtosecond-assisted LASIK group achieved an uncorrected distance visual acuity of -0.1 logMAR or better (P < .005), 4 eyes (2%) in the transepithelial PRK and 2 eyes (1%) in the femtosecond-assisted LASIK group lost 2 lines of corrected distance visual acuity (P = .04), and 163 eyes (83%) in the transepithelial PRK and 167 eyes (85%) in the femtosecond-assisted LASIK group were within ±0.50 diopter (D) of emmetropia. The postoperative mean spherical equivalent was +0.11 D ± 0.56 (SD) for transepithelial PRK and -0.09 ± 0.46 D for femtosecond-assisted LASIK (P < .0001).
  
  
  
  Transepithelial PRK outcomes 1 year postoperatively were equivalent to those of femtosecond-assisted LASIK. Transepithelial PRK was efficacious and safe; however, the procedure had a longer recovery time than the femtosecond-assisted LASIK.
  
  
  
  Mr. Ewering and Dr. Arba-Mosquera are employees of Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH and Co. KG. Dr. Luger has no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
authors.affiliation: From Bergman Clinics (Luger), Utrecht, the Netherlands; Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH and Co. KG (Ewering, Arba-Mosquera), Kleinostheim, Germany. Electronic address: m.luger@bergmanclinics.nl.
authors.forename: Michiel H A
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Luger
authors.affiliation: From Bergman Clinics (Luger), Utrecht, the Netherlands; Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH and Co. KG (Ewering, Arba-Mosquera), Kleinostheim, Germany.
authors.forename: Tobias
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Ewering
authors.affiliation: From Bergman Clinics (Luger), Utrecht, the Netherlands; Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH and Co. KG (Ewering, Arba-Mosquera), Kleinostheim, Germany.
authors.forename: Samuel
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Arba-Mosquera
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D000074431:Keratectomy; D020731:Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ; D054018:Lasers, Excimer; D009216:Myopia / Q000601:surgery*; D018903:Photorefractive Keratectomy; D012029:Refraction, Ocular; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome