{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,23]],"date-time":"2026-10-23T01:05:20Z","timestamp":1792717520097,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":21,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]],"date-time":"2021-04-16T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1618531200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]],"date-time":"2021-04-16T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1618531200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/100007816","name":"Alcon","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["# 63482385 (independent publication grant)"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["# 63482385 (independent publication grant)"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100007816","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Ophthalmol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To compare early clinical outcomes of single-step transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) regarding refractive outcome, visual acuity, wound healing, pain intensity and visual recovery time.d.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>In this prospective clinical observational study 200 eyes of 100 consecutive patients with mild to moderate myopia with or without mild astigmatism were included. One hundred eyes each were either treated with StreamLight\u2122 tPRK or PRK with the WaveLight\u00ae EX500 excimer laser. Visual acuity (Decimal) was assessed preoperatively and at day 4, 7 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Wound healing (hours between surgery and complete epithelial closure) was monitored at the slit lamp. At day 4, patients subjectively rated the maximum pain intensity within the last 4 days using a numerical pain rating scale (0\u201315).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Visual recovery was significantly faster in the tPRK group. At days 4 and 7, the mean monocular UCDVA was significantly better in the tPRK group than in the PRK group (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001). Four days after surgery 72\u2009% of eyes in the tPRK group but no eye in the PRK had a UCDVA of 0.7 or better. At six weeks postoperatively, a UCDVA of 1.0 or better was achieved in both groups. Complete epithelial wound closure was achieved significantly faster in the tPRK group (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.0001) and maximum pain level within the first 4 days after surgery was significantly lower in the tPRK group (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.0001). No patient had lost a line of BCDVA and no complications or adverse effects were observed.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>According to our early clinical results, both treatments options appear to be safe and effective methods for the correction of low to moderate myopia with and without astigmatism. However, in our study, StreamLight\u2122 tPRK offered faster visual recovery and epithelial healing and was associated with less pain compared to PRK. It can therefore be considered a good treatment option for patients who refuse or are not eligible for Femto-LASIK, but at the same time demand a faster and more comfortable recovery time than PRK can offer.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]],"date-time":"2021-04-16T19:05:54Z","timestamp":1618599954000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":43,"title":["Early clinical outcomes and comparison between trans-PRK and PRK, regarding refractive outcome, wound healing, pain intensity and visual recovery time in a real\u2010world setup"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"21","author":[{"given":"Harald C.","family":"Gaeckle","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]]},"reference":[{"key":"1941_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Manasvee S, Kapadia Wilson SE. One-Year Results of PRK in Low and moderate Myopia: Fewer Than 0.5\u2009% of Eyes Lose Two or More Lines of Vision. Cornea 2000;19:180-4.","DOI":"10.1097\/00003226-200003000-00011"},{"key":"1941_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"McDonald MB, Liu JD, Byrd TJ, et al. Central photorefractive keratectomy for myopia: partially sighted and normally sighted eyes. Ophthalmology.\u00a01991;98:1327\u201337.","DOI":"10.1016\/S0161-6420(91)32128-6"},{"key":"1941_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1076\/soph.18.1.2.14074","volume":"18","author":"R Ambr\u00f3sio Jr","year":"2003","unstructured":"Ambr\u00f3sio R Jr, Wilson S. LASIK vs LASEK vs PRK: Advantages and indications. Semin Ophthalmol 2003;18:2\u201310.","journal-title":"Semin Ophthalmol"},{"key":"1941_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"157","DOI":"10.1016\/S0039-6257(98)00027-7","volume":"43","author":"RF Steinert","year":"1998","unstructured":"Steinert RF, Bafna S. Surgical correction of moderate myopia: Which method should you choose? II. PRK and LASIK are the treatments of choice. Surv Ophthalmol 1998;43:157\u2013179.","journal-title":"Surv Ophthalmol"},{"key":"1941_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.1515\/bmte.1986.31.s1.68","volume":"31","author":"T Bende","year":"1986","unstructured":"Bende T, Seiler T, Wollensak J. Excimer Laser in der Ophthalmologie. Biomed Technik\/Biomed Engineering. 1986;31:68\u20139.","journal-title":"Biomed Technik\/Biomed Engineering"},{"key":"1941_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"682","DOI":"10.3928\/1081597X-20120921-02","volume":"28","author":"MT Magone","year":"2012","unstructured":"Magone MT, Engle AT, Easter TH, et al. Flap-off epi-LASIK versus automated epithelial brush in PRK: a prospective comparison study of pain and reepithelialization times. J Refract Surg 2012;28:682\u20139.","journal-title":"J Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1016\/j.optom.2014.09.001","volume":"8","author":"J Tom\u00e1s-Juan","year":"2015","unstructured":"Tom\u00e1s-Juan J, Larra\u00f1aga AMG, Hanneken L. Corneal Regeneration After Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Review. J Optom 2015;8:149\u201369.","journal-title":"J Optom"},{"key":"1941_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"973","DOI":"10.2147\/OPTH.S32374","volume":"6","author":"IM Aslanides","year":"2012","unstructured":"Aslanides IM, Padroni S, Arba Mosquera S, et al. Comparison of single-step reverse transepithelial all-surface laser ablation (ASLA) to alcohol-assisted photorefractive keratectomy. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012; 6:973\u2013980.","journal-title":"Clin Ophthalmol"},{"key":"1941_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kaiserman I, Sadi N, Mimouni M, et al. Corneal Breakthrough Haze After Photorefractive Keratectomy With Mitomycin C: Incidence and Risk Factors. Cornea 2017;36:961\u2013966.","DOI":"10.1097\/ICO.0000000000001231"},{"key":"1941_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"110","DOI":"10.1016\/S0886-3350(03)00519-4","volume":"30","author":"NS Jabbur","year":"2004","unstructured":"Jabbur NS, Tuli S, Barequet IS, O\u2019Brien TP. Outcomes of laser in situ keratomileusis in patients with pigment dispersion syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004;30:110\u20134.","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1817","DOI":"10.1007\/s00417-010-1312-2","volume":"248","author":"J Koshimizu","year":"2010","unstructured":"Koshimizu J, Dhanuka R, Yamaguchi T. Ten-year follow\u2010up of photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2010; 248: 1817\u20131825.","journal-title":"Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol"},{"key":"1941_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"710","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2016.01.047","volume":"42","author":"BCH Ang","year":"2016","unstructured":"Ang BCH, Foo RCM, Lim EWL, et al. Risk factors for early-onset corneal haze after photorefractive keratectomy in an Asian population: Outcomes from the Singapore Armed Forces Corneal Refractive Surgery Programme 2006 to 2013. J Cataract Refract Surg 2016;42:710\u20136.","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"365","DOI":"10.3928\/1542-8877-19980501-03","volume":"29","author":"M Assouline","year":"1998","unstructured":"Assouline M, Renard G, Arne JL, David T, et al. A prospective randomized trial of topical soluble 0.1\u2009% indomethacin versus 0.1\u2009% diclofenac versus placebo for the control of pain following excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy. J Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 1998;29:365\u2013374.","journal-title":"J Ophthalmic Surg Lasers"},{"key":"1941_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"365","DOI":"10.3928\/1081-597X-19960301-11","volume":"12","author":"CA McCarty","year":"1996","unstructured":"McCarty CA, Garrett SK, Aldred GF, Taylor HR. Assessment of subjective pain following photorefractive keratectomy. Melbourne Excimer Laser Group. J Refract Surg 1996;12:365\u2013369.","journal-title":"Melbourne Excimer Laser Group. J Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"154","DOI":"10.1186\/s12886-018-0827-x","volume":"18","author":"Jun","year":"2018","unstructured":"Jun et al. Comparison between Wavefront-optimized and corneal Wavefront-guided Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in moderate to high astigmatism. BMC Ophthalmology 2018; 18:154. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12886-018-0827-x","journal-title":"BMC Ophthalmology"},{"key":"1941_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1267","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2018.07.021","volume":"44","author":"S Adib-Moghaddam","year":"2018","unstructured":"Adib-Moghaddam S, Soleyman-Jahi S, Moghaddam AS, et al. Efficacy and safety of transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg 2018; 44:1267\u20131279.","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"358","DOI":"10.4103\/2008-322X.194070","volume":"11","author":"M Naderi","year":"2016","unstructured":"Naderi M, Jadidi K, Mosavi SA, Daneshi SA. Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy for Low to Moderate Myopia in Comparison with Conventional Photorefractive Keratectomy. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2016; 11: 358\u2013362.","journal-title":"J Ophthalmic Vis Res"},{"key":"1941_CR18","unstructured":"Kommission Refraktive Chirurgie (KRC). Bewertung und Qualit\u00e4tssicherung refraktiv-chirurgischer Eingriffe durch die DOG und den BVA \u2013 KRC-Empfehlungen. 2019. https:\/\/www.aad.to\/krc\/qualit.pdf"},{"key":"1941_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1852","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcrs.2011.04.029","volume":"37","author":"A Fadlallah","year":"2011","unstructured":"Fadlallah A, Fahed D, Khalil K, Dunia I, Menassa J, El Rami H, et al. Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy: Clinical results. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:1852\u20131857.","journal-title":"J Cataract Refract Surg"},{"key":"1941_CR20","first-page":"65","volume":"1","author":"K Bechert","year":"2009","unstructured":"Bechert K, Abraham SE. Pain Management and Wound Care. J Am Col Certif Wound Spec. 2009; 1: 65\u201371.","journal-title":"J Am Col Certif Wound Spec"},{"issue":"10","key":"1941_CR21","first-page":"A-624","volume":"100","author":"B Lachenmayr","year":"2003","unstructured":"Lachenmayr B. Anforderungen an das Sehverm\u00f6gen des Kraftfahrers. Dtsch Arztebl 2003; 100(10): A-624 \/ B-532 \/ C-503.","journal-title":"Dtsch Arztebl"}],"container-title":["BMC Ophthalmology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2022,12,24]],"date-time":"2022-12-24T09:54:15Z","timestamp":1671875655000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcophthalmol.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]]},"references-count":21,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1941"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12886-021-01941-3","relation":{"has-preprint":[{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21203\/rs.3.rs-121343\/v1","asserted-by":"object"}]},"ISSN":["1471-2415"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2415","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,16]]},"assertion":[{"value":"3 December 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"8 April 2021","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"16 April 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Ethical approval was not required and deemed unnecessary according to national regulations of the Bavarian Medical Association (Bayerische Landes\u00e4rztekammer (BL\u00c4K) Ethikkomission (name of institutional review board, ethics committee), M\u00fchlbaurstra\u00dfe 16, 81677 M\u00fcnchen, Dr. med. Ulrike Artmeier-Brandt, E-Mail: u.artmeier-brandt@blaek.de Internet:\n                      \n                      : \u201cStudy projects with anonymized data (no code list available, no personal reference can be established) are not subject to consultation\u201d.Link:\n                      \n                      .<b>Patient consent to participate in this study<\/b>:All patients provided a signed informed consent form for data collection and consent to participate in this study with data evaluation and publication.The research has been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The author has no financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"181"}}