search
Back to results

Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia

Primary Purpose

Refractive Surgery, Myopia

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy
Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy
Sponsored by
Minia University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Refractive Surgery

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 54 Years (Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age over 18 years
  • Primary myopia or compound myopic astigmatism
  • Preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) within the range of -1.50 to -7 D
  • Stable refraction for at least 1 year before the surgery
  • Contact lens discontinuation for at least 3 weeks
  • Estimated stromal corneal bed thickness of >330 μm at the thinnest location.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous ocular surgery
  • Active ocular diseases
  • Corneal dystrophy
  • Retinal disease
  • Glaucoma
  • Dry eye
  • History of severe eye trauma
  • Irregular astigmatism or suspected keratoconus on corneal topography
  • Systemic disease that could affect corneal wound healing such as collagen diseases, diabetes mellitus, and pregnancy.

Sites / Locations

  • Shaaban A Elwan
  • Security forces hospital

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Transepithelial PRK

Alcohol assisted PRK

Arm Description

Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 right eyes of 100 patients included in the study.

Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 left eyes of the same 100 patients included in the study.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Visual acuity means
visual acuity means in decimal value from minimum 0.1 to maximum 1.2.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Surgical time
surgical time in seconds
Pain scores
pain scores,from 0 -10, 11-category numeric pain scale (NPS, 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst possible pain)
Haze levels
haze levels from 0 o 4 (0 = no haze; 0.5 = trace haze on oblique illumination; 1 = corneal
Complete epithelial healing time
complete epithelial healing time in days.

Full Information

First Posted
April 27, 2018
Last Updated
June 22, 2018
Sponsor
Minia University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03569423
Brief Title
Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia
Official Title
Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
June 2018
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
February 15, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
April 15, 2018 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 25, 2018 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Minia University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to compare visual acuity means, refractive results, safety, and efficacy of TPRK with AAPRK as primary outcomes and surgical time, pain scores, haze levels, and healing time as secondary outcomes. SETTING: Security Forces Hospital, Ophthalmology Department, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. DESIGN: Prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case-control comparative study. . METHODS: A total of 200 eyes of 100 patients were included. One hundred eyes underwent TPRK in the right eye (study group) and 100 eyes underwent AAPRK in the left eye (control group). Ablations performed with the Schwind Amaris, 750S. Clinical outcomes were compared Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.
Detailed Description
Introduction Previous studies document that, although Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) is the most worldwide performed refractive procedure, surface ablation may be safer to avoid flap complications, corneal weakening, and a higher risk of iatrogenic keratectasia associated with LASIK and thus the era of surface ablation emerged as an alternative (1). Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is one of the surface ablation procedures and performed after corneal epithelial debridement accompanied by post-operative pain, discomfort, and high grade of corneal haze, all of which limit its popularity (2). The traditional method for corneal epithelium removal before excimer LASER was manual scraping, which was later enhanced by using an alcohol solution 20% or brush (3). In 2003, Camellin introduced a new alcohol-assisted technique called laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) that allowed the epithelium to be preserved as a flap and applied back to the stromal corneal bed after laser treatment (4). Also in 2003, Pallikaris invented epithelial laser in situ keratomileusis (Epi-LASIK) which is another method that uses the epithelial flap and performed with a microkeratome (called epi-keratome) with a blunt oscillating blade. After trans-epithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TPRK) was introduced, where removal of the epithelium is done by phototherapeutic ablation followed by refractive ablation of the corneal stroma. Several studies emerged and advocated many techniques for epithelial removal , but this 2-step technique was not worldwide used due to the prolonged surgery time with the older generation of lasers, corneal dehydration, increased post-operative pain, and a deficiency of adjusted nomograms (5). When new generations of faster lasers, improved ablation algorithms, and nomograms have emerged, it allowed development of a new TPRK non touch: all-surface ablation technique which allows ablation the corneal epithelium and stroma in a single-step with one ablation profile. This aspheric profile is calculated according to data from the literature estimating that the normal corneal epithelial thickness is 55 μm centrally and 65 peripherally at 4 mm radially from the center (6). A number of recent studies demonstrated that this single-step TPRK is a relatively new procedure with many advantages such as, reduced surgical time, minimizing the size of epithelial defect to that required for stromal ablation, no alcohol use avoiding potential toxicity to the limbal cells, less post-operative pain and corneal haze with rapid healing time and faster visual recovery (7).Thus, there is a need for an updated comparative evaluation based on a larger number of eyes. The aim of our study is to compare 6-months un-corrected distant visual acuity (UDVA) and best corrected distant visual acuity (BCDVA) means, refractive results, safety, and efficacy of single-step TPRK with alcohol-assisted PRK (AAPRK) as primary outcomes and comparison of surgical time, pain scores, and haze levels, complete epithelial healing time, as secondary outcomes among the two procedures when used to correct mild to moderate myopia and myopic astigmatism. Subjects and methods This study is a prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case-control study that includes eyes that underwent either single-step TPRK or AAPRK between February 2017 and April 2018, at the Security Forces Hospital, Ophthalmology department, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study was approved by the local ethical board committee. Before the surgical procedure, each patient was adequately informed about the study as well as the risks and benefits of the surgery, and signed informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. A total of 200 eyes of 100 consecutive patients were included; One hundred eyes underwent TPRK (study group) and 100 eyes underwent AAPRK (control group). The study design choice of the procedure was fixed for each patient: the right eye underwent TPRK and the contra-lateral left eye AAPRK. Patients demographics and preoperative variables are demonstrated in Table (1). There are no significant differences in pre-operative variables of patients in the TPRK and AAPRK groups except the patients' genders. The percentage of females is 77% and males 23%. Patients who attended all visits, without any missing data, were included in the statistical analysis. Preoperative Examination The preoperative examination included UDVA, BCDVA, manifest and cycloplegic refraction, slit lamp biomicroscopy, tonometry, Pentacam camera (OCULUS- Netzteil Art., pentacam HR, Germany), tomography (Sirius, SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions GmbH, Kleinostheim, Germany), and dilated fundus examination using binocular ophthalmoscopy. Contact lenses use and medical history, including any systemic diseases, were recorded. Surgical Technique All surgeries were performed with 6th-generation Amaris excimer LASER 193, version 750 S (Schwind eye-tech-solutions GmbH& Co.KG, Mainparkstrasse, Kleinostheim, Germany). Ablations were based on aberration-free algorithms calculated using ORK-CAM software with beam size 0.54 mm full width and high-speed eye tracking. Treatments were performed by 2 surgeons (BA & ESH ) using an identical surgical protocol. The treatments were mostly aimed at emmetropia. Before the surgery, tetracaine hydrochloride 0.5% ophthalmic solution (Bausch & Lomb, Minims) and moxifloxacin 0.5% (Vigamox, Alcon Co.) drops were instilled 3 times within a 5-minutes interval. The eyelids were prepared with antiseptic Chlorohexidine Gluconate 0.05% solution (Saudi Medical Solution Company) and opened using a wire lid speculum. In the AAPRK group, the cornea was exposed to a 20% ethyl alcohol solution for 25 seconds with the use of a well. Subsequently, a superficial cut of the epithelium was made with either an 8.5 or 9.5 mm diameter trephine. The epithelium was mechanically debrided with the well or with a blunt spatula, then LASER treatment with the same machine was initiated. In the TPRK group, where aspheric aberration-free TPRK ablation algorithm was used (Schwind eye-tech-solutions), the epithelium was removed during laser ablation only from the area of the total ablation zone. In both groups and in all cases, immediately after treatment, the eye was washed with a balanced salt solution (BSS) for 20 seconds. Then, to fight against post-operative corneal haze, mitomycin C 0.02% (MMC) was applied for 30 seconds followed by copious irrigation of the eye with BSS. Intra-operative complications were not noted and surgical time starting from eye lid speculum insertion to the time of its removal at the end of the procedure were recorded. After the surgery, a bandage contact lens was applied (BIOMEDICS Evolution CL ocufilcon D 45%, water 55%) for 7 days. The postoperative regimen included tobradex eye drops 0.3% (Tobramycin 0.3% - dexamethazone 0.1% sterile eye drops, Alcon Co.) with tapering dose for 1 month starting with QID/ 1 week, TID/ 1 week, BID/ 1 week and once a day/1 week, moxifloxacin drops 0.5% (Vigamox, Alcon Co.) for 2 weeks, and sodium hyaluronate 0.2% (Hyfresh eye drops, Jamjoom Pharma Co.) drop / 2 hours and a gradual decreasing of the frequency for 3 months. Pain killer oral medication tablet/ 6 hours was used in the first post-operative days if needed. Postoperative Examinations Patients were instructed to visit the clinic for postoperative examinations and follow up after 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months. Examinations at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months included UDVA ,but the BCDVA and manifest refraction were measured at 1, 3, and 6 months. Slit lamp biomicroscopy was done in each visit. Corneal haze grading was evaluated according to Fantes et al., 1990 proposal (0 = no haze; 0.5 = trace haze on oblique illumination; 1 = corneal cloudiness not interfering with the visibility of fine iris details; 2 = mild effacement of fine iris details; 3 and 4 = details of the lens and iris not discernible). Healing time in which complete re-epithelialisation occurred in both eyes were recorded. In post-operative day 1, day 3 and week 1, We used a discrete, 11-category numeric pain scale (NPS, 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst possible pain) to evaluate pain score in each eye and patients response were recorded at early postoperative period. Six months post-operatively, patients were asked about the overall satisfaction with each procedure as high, moderate, low, and not satisfied, and whether they would decide to have the surgery again (yes, no) were recorded. Statistical Analysis Patients' data were entered in Microsoft Excel, copied and analyzed using Sigma Plot-Scientific Data Program for the 2 groups, Paired student's t-test was used for the UDVA & BCDVA means in decimal values and for MRSE means. Mann-Whitney test was used for pain scores, haze levels, and healing time. For all tests, a (P value < 0.05) was considered statistically significant. A Graph Pad Prism 5 program was used for graphs constructions.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Refractive Surgery, Myopia

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case-control comparative study.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Non-Randomized
Enrollment
100 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Transepithelial PRK
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 right eyes of 100 patients included in the study.
Arm Title
Alcohol assisted PRK
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 left eyes of the same 100 patients included in the study.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy
Other Intervention Name(s)
TPRK
Intervention Description
ablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy
Other Intervention Name(s)
APRK
Intervention Description
ablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Visual acuity means
Description
visual acuity means in decimal value from minimum 0.1 to maximum 1.2.
Time Frame
6 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Surgical time
Description
surgical time in seconds
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Pain scores
Description
pain scores,from 0 -10, 11-category numeric pain scale (NPS, 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst possible pain)
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Haze levels
Description
haze levels from 0 o 4 (0 = no haze; 0.5 = trace haze on oblique illumination; 1 = corneal
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Complete epithelial healing time
Description
complete epithelial healing time in days.
Time Frame
6 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
54 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Age over 18 years Primary myopia or compound myopic astigmatism Preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) within the range of -1.50 to -7 D Stable refraction for at least 1 year before the surgery Contact lens discontinuation for at least 3 weeks Estimated stromal corneal bed thickness of >330 μm at the thinnest location. Exclusion Criteria: Previous ocular surgery Active ocular diseases Corneal dystrophy Retinal disease Glaucoma Dry eye History of severe eye trauma Irregular astigmatism or suspected keratoconus on corneal topography Systemic disease that could affect corneal wound healing such as collagen diseases, diabetes mellitus, and pregnancy.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Shaaban A Elwan, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Minia University
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Shaaban A Elwan
City
Al Minya
Country
Egypt
Facility Name
Security forces hospital
City
Riyadh
State/Province
Central
ZIP/Postal Code
11481-3643
Country
Saudi Arabia

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
15093657
Citation
Leaming DV. Practice styles and preferences of ASCRS members--2003 survey. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 Apr;30(4):892-900. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.02.064.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
16105600
Citation
Blake CR, Cervantes-Castaneda RA, Macias-Rodriguez Y, Anzoulatous G, Anderson R, Chayet AS. Comparison of postoperative pain in patients following photorefractive keratectomy versus advanced surface ablation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Jul;31(7):1314-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.11.046.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
9331192
Citation
Abad JC, An B, Power WJ, Foster CS, Azar DT, Talamo JH. A prospective evaluation of alcohol-assisted versus mechanical epithelial removal before photorefractive keratectomy. Ophthalmology. 1997 Oct;104(10):1566-74; discussion 1574-5. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(97)30095-5.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
14640432
Citation
Camellin M. Laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia. J Refract Surg. 2003 Nov-Dec;19(6):666-70. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-20031101-09.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
7553113
Citation
Carr JD, Patel R, Hersh PS. Management of late corneal haze following photorefractive keratectomy. J Refract Surg. 1995 May-Jun;11(3 Suppl):S309-13. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-19950502-25.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
16772894
Citation
Sin S, Simpson TL. The repeatability of corneal and corneal epithelial thickness measurements using optical coherence tomography. Optom Vis Sci. 2006 Jun;83(6):360-5. doi: 10.1097/01.opx.0000221388.26031.23.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
21840678
Citation
Fadlallah A, Fahed D, Khalil K, Dunia I, Menassa J, El Rami H, Chlela E, Fahed S. Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy: clinical results. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011 Oct;37(10):1852-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.04.029. Epub 2011 Aug 15.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
30538854
Citation
Bakhsh AM, Elwan SAM, Chaudhry AA, El-Atris TM, Al-Howish TM. Comparison between Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy versus Alcohol-Assisted Photorefractive Keratectomy in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism. J Ophthalmol. 2018 Nov 12;2018:5376235. doi: 10.1155/2018/5376235. eCollection 2018.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs