Free Papers
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intraoperative plasma rich in growth factor (PRGF) vs mitomycin C (MMC) in patients undergoing photorefractive keratectomy (PRK)
Free Paper Details
First Author: E.Uribe Badillo PERU
Co Author(s): R. Sanchez Avila J. Merayo Lloves
Abstract Details
Purpose:
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF) in prevention of corneal haze in patients undergoing PRK surgery and the comparison with the use of mitomycin c
Setting:
Fernandez Vega University Institute - Eye Surface Unit (IUFV) Oviedo-Spain
Methods:
This is a case-control study, longitudinal, retrospective that compares MMC vs PRGF in patients undergoing PRK with -0.25 to -8.00 D sphere and -0.25 to -3.00 cylinder. The MMC was in 0.02% concentration, applying 10 seconds per diopter treated and PRGF liquid was used for one minute on the stromal bed. The primary outcomes were changes in UDVA (uncorrected distance visual acuity) and refractive changes. Refractive efficacy, safety indices, changes in ECD (endothelial cell density), and adverse events were evaluated. Predictability was also assessed with the post-operative MSE (Manifest spherical equivalent) after 6 months of follow-up.
Results:
Forty-four patients (72 eyes) were treated with MMC and twenty-five patients (45 eyes) with PRGF. The final UDVA in MMC was 0.029±0.065 and in PRGF was 0.028±0.048 (p=0.383). The efficacy index was 0.98±0.10 for MMC and 1.10±0.46 for PRGF (p=0.062). The safety index was 1.03±0.11 for MMC and 1.12±0.46 for PRGF (p=0.158). The ECD decreased 0.9±11.6% for MMC and 4.3±13.1% for PRGF (p=0.593).The predictability was 92.1% for MMC and 91.9% for PRGF (p=0.976). There were adverse events reports in 8 eyes (11.1%) for MMC and no reports of adverse events for PRGF.
Conclusions:
The use of intraoperative PRGF in PRK surgery is as effective as MMC, but it has a better safety profile without statistically significant differences in refractive parameters during the follow-up.
Financial Disclosure:
-
