• Ronald M Sanchez-Avila, Edmar E Uribe-Badillo, Javier Fernández-Vega Sanz, Francisco Muruzabal, Nancy Jurado, Belén Alfonso-Bartolozzi, Jose F Alfonso, Begoña Baamonde, Eduardo Anitua, and Jesus Merayo-Lloves.
• Instituto Universitario Fernández-Vega, Fundación de Investigación Oftalmológica, Universidad de Oviedo.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Jan 22; 100 (3): e24139.

AbstractTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) in photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus Mitomycin C (MMC).This is a comparative, longitudinal and retrospective case-control study (MMC vs PRGF), in patients with a spherical correction from -0.25 to -8.00 D and cylinder correction from -0.25 to -3.00. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), refractive efficacy and safety indices, and changes in endothelial cell density were evaluated. The predictability was assessed with the postoperative manifest spherical equivalent.Forty-four patients (72 eyes) were treated with MMC and twenty-five patients (45 eyes) with PRGF. The final UDVA (LogMar) in MMC was 0.029 ± 0.065 and in PRGF it was 0.028 ± 0.048 (p = 0.383). The efficacy index for MMC was 0.98 ± 0.10 and 1.10 ± 0.46 for patients treated with PRGF (p = 0.062). The safety index for MMC was 1.03 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.46 (p = 0.158) for PRGF group. The change percentage of endothelial cell density was 0.9 ± 11.6 for MMC and 4.3 ± 13.1 for PRGF (p = 0.593). The predictability for MMC was 92.1% and for the PRGF was 91.9% (p = 0.976). Hyperemia, eye pain and superficial keratitis were observed in 11.1% of the MMC group; no adverse events were observed with the PRGF.The use of PRGF in PRK surgery is as effective as MMC. The PRGF shows a better safety profile than MMC for its intraoperative use in PRK.Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

31 keywords...

hide…