Refractive SurgeryNCT03569423
Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia
A study testing Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy and Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy in people with Refractive Surgery and Myopia, run by Minia University at 2 sites in 2 countries.
Trial 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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 54 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Refractive Surgery, Myopia
- What is being tested?
- Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy and Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 15 Feb 2017to 25 Apr 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 54 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- 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.
Who cannot join
- Previous ocular surgery
- Active ocular diseases
- Corneal dystrophy
- Retinal disease
- Glaucoma
- Dry eye
Show all 9Show fewer
- 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.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 2 countries.
2 sites in 2 countries
About this study
Official title: Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism
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.
Read more
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.
Read the 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.
- Conditions
- Refractive Surgery, Myopia
- Being tested
- Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy, Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy
- Medical subject headings
- Myopia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomyProcedure or surgery
Also called TPRK
ablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.
Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomyProcedure or surgery
Also called APRK
ablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Transepithelial PRK | Experimental | Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 right eyes of 100 patients included in the study. Receives: Procedure: Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy; Procedure: Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy |
| Alcohol assisted PRK | Active comparator | Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 left eyes of the same 100 patients included in the study. Receives: Procedure: Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy; Procedure: Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Visual acuity means
visual acuity means in decimal value from minimum 0.1 to maximum 1.2.
Measured: 6 months
Secondary outcomes (4)
Surgical time
surgical time in seconds
Measured: 6 months
Pain scores
pain scores,from 0 -10, 11-category numeric pain scale (NPS, 0 = no pain and 10 = the worst possible pain)
Measured: 6 months
Haze levels
haze levels from 0 o 4 (0 = no haze; 0.5 = trace haze on oblique illumination; 1 = corneal
Measured: 6 months
Complete epithelial healing time
complete epithelial healing time in days.
Measured: 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jun 2018
- Study start15 Feb 2017
- Primary completion15 Apr 2018
- Study completion25 Apr 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Refractive SurgeryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Minia UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case-control comparative study.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Minia University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Hossam Mohamed Moharram, Minia University
- Investigators
- Shaaban A Elwan, MD, Principal investigator, Minia University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03569423
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MiniaU2
- Status last verified
- Jun 2018
- First submitted
- 27 Apr 2018
- Last updated
- 26 Jun 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
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.
PubMed 15093657Blake 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.
PubMed 16105600Abad 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.
PubMed 9331192Camellin M. Laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia. J Refract Surg. 2003 Nov-Dec;19(6):666-70. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-20031101-09.
PubMed 14640432Carr 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.
PubMed 7553113Sin 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.
PubMed 16772894Fadlallah 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.
PubMed 21840678Bakhsh 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.
PubMed 30538854
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jun 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison Between TPRK Versus AAPRK in Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03569423
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MiniaU2
- Conditions
- Refractive Surgery, Myopia
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Minia UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Feb 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Apr 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 25 Apr 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Jun 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Prospective, consecutive, nonrandomized case-control comparative study.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Transepithelial PRK | Experimental | Procedure: Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy, Procedure: Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomyTransepithelial photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 right eyes of 100 patients included in the study. |
| Alcohol assisted PRK | Active comparator | Procedure: Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy, Procedure: Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomyAlcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy was done in 100 left eyes of the same 100 patients included in the study. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 54 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- 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
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Previous ocular surgery
- Active ocular diseases
- Corneal dystrophy
- Retinal disease
- Glaucoma
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomyAlso: TPRKablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis. | Procedure or surgery | Alcohol assisted PRK, Transepithelial PRK |
| Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomyAlso: APRKablations were performed with the Schwind Amaris excimer LASER 750S. Paired student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis. | Procedure or surgery | Alcohol assisted PRK, Transepithelial PRK |
Primary outcome
Visual acuity means
Time frame: 6 months
visual acuity means in decimal value from minimum 0.1 to maximum 1.2.
4 secondary outcomes
Surgical time
Time frame: 6 months
Pain scores
Time frame: 6 months
Haze levels
Time frame: 6 months
Complete epithelial healing time
Time frame: 6 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Jun 2018.
- Results publication: PubMed 15093657Leaming 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 publication: PubMed 16105600Blake 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 publication: PubMed 9331192Abad 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 publication: PubMed 14640432Camellin M. Laser epithelial keratomileusis for myopia. J Refract Surg. 2003 Nov-Dec;19(6):666-70. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-20031101-09.
- Results publication: PubMed 7553113Carr 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 publication: PubMed 16772894Sin 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 publication: PubMed 21840678Fadlallah 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30538854Bakhsh 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.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Refractive Surgery
RecruitingObservational study
UNITY DX Cornea Study
Tomography
RecruitingPhase 4
Arcuate Incisions With Light Adjustable Lens for Astigmatism Correction in Lens Surgery
Astigmatism
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Postoperative Outcome Verification of Discrepant Toric IOL Calculator Recommendations After Cataract Surgery
Cataract
Active, not recruiting
Ocular Hypotony and Refractive Predictability in RRD Surgery
Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment, Hypotony Ocular
Active, not recruiting
Contralateral Claims Study of Clareon Vivity Pro
Aphakia, Presbyopia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Shaaban A Elwan, MD principal investigator
Minia University
2 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy and Alcohol assisted photorefractive keratectomy in people with Refractive Surgery and Myopia, run by Minia University at 2 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jun 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Egypt, Saudi Arabia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Visual acuity means (time frame: 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03569423, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jun 2018.