论文部分内容阅读
目的研究不同方式的角膜准分子激光手术(LASIK、LASEK)对术后高阶像差的影响。设计病例对照研究。研究对象行LASIK及LASEK患者各22例(各43眼)。方法对行LASIK或LASEK的患者术前、术后1、3、6个月进行波前像差检查。主要指标视力、屈光、波前像差的变化。结果两种手术方式的术后视力与等效球镜度相近。6mm瞳孔直径下,术后1个月时,总波前像差的RMS值比术前减少61%,高阶像差增加110%。术后高阶像差的主要成分大部分增加;其中,球差增加最大,1个月时比术前增加285%。术后1、3个月,LASIK术式组高阶像差RMS值稍低于LASEK术式组;术后6个月,LASIK术式组高阶像差RMS值稍高于LASEK术式组(P>0.05)。其中,两组的三阶彗差、三叶草、球差RMS值改变无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论LASIK与LASEK患者术后视力与屈光结果相近。术后总波前像差和低阶像差降低,高阶像差增加。不同手术方式对术后高阶像差无显著性影响。(眼科,2006,15:191-194)
Objective To study the effect of different modes of corneal excimer laser surgery (LASIK, LASEK) on higher order aberrations. Design a case-control study. Twenty-two patients (43 eyes each) underwent LASIK and LASEK. Methods The patients with LASIK or LASEK underwent wavefront aberration examination before operation and one, three and six months after operation. The main indicators of visual acuity, refractive, wavefront aberration changes. Results The two methods of postoperative visual acuity and spherical equivalent degree of similar. At 6 mm pupil diameter, the RMS value of total wavefront aberration decreased 61% and the higher order aberrations increased 110% at 1 month after surgery. Most of the major components of postoperative high-order aberrations increased, of which the spherical aberration increased the most, 285% more than the preoperative one month later. At 1 month and 3 months after operation, the RMS of higher order aberrations of LASIK group was slightly lower than that of LASEK group. At 6 months after operation, the RMS value of higher order aberrations of LASIK group was slightly higher than that of LASEK group P> 0.05). Among them, the third-order coma aberration, clover, spherical aberration RMS value had no significant change (P> 0.05). Conclusion The visual acuity and refractive results of LASIK and LASEK patients are similar. Postoperative total wavefront aberration and lower order aberrations decreased, higher order aberrations increased. Different surgical methods have no significant effect on postoperative high order aberrations. (Ophthalmology, 2006,15: 191-194)