Basir Eye health Research Center
  • Register
  • Login

Journal of Ophthalmic and Optometric Sciences

  • Home
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • Editorial Policies
    • Indexing & Abstracting
    • Privacy Statement
  • Current Issue
  • Archives
  • Editorial Team
  • Ethical Considerations
  • Copy Right Form
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submit Article
  • COPE Compliance
  • Contact
Advanced Search
  1. Home
  2. Archives
  3. Vol. 9 No. 3 (2025): In Press
  4. Original Articles

Vol. 9 No. 3 (2025)

June 2025

Comparison of the Effect of Autologous Serum versus Preservative-Free Artificial Tears after Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Contralateral-Eye Clinical Trial

  • Mandana Ahmadi
  • Zhale Rajavi
  • Hossein Mohammad Rebie

Journal of Ophthalmic and Optometric Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 3 (2025), 22 June 2025 , Page 11-18
https://doi.org/10.22037/joos.v9i3.51181 Published: 2025-06-22

  • View Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • References
  • Statastics
  • Share

Abstract

Purpose: To compare 20 % autologous serum (AS) with preservative-free artificial tears (PFAT) for epithelial healing and early outcomes after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).
Patients and Methods: Prospective, contralateral-eye clinical trial including 60 myopic patients (120 eyes). In each patient, one randomly assigned eye received 20 % AS and the fellow eye PFAT post-PRK. Primary outcome was time to complete epithelial closure. Secondary outcomes included day-by-day postoperative pain (Days 1–3), epithelial defect (ED) size (Days 1–2), corneal haze, and uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) at 12 weeks. Standardized PRK technique and identical bandage contact lenses were used. Paired-eye statistics were applied (paired t-test or Wilcoxon as appropriate; χ² for categorical data; α=0.05).
Results: Epithelial closure time did not differ between groups (AS 3.00 ± 0.33 vs. PFAT 3.03 ± 0.21 days; P=0.655). Mean Day-1 pain was numerically lower with AS overall (AS 3.28 ± 1.75 vs. PFAT 3.60 ± 1.83), and significantly lower among women (AS 3.39 ± 1.96 vs. PFAT 4.11 ± 2.05; P = 0.003). Pain declined to near-zero by Day-2 in both groups (AS 0.07 ± 0.31 vs. PFAT 0.08 ± 0.38). ED size was similar on Day-1 (AS 5.50 ± 0.73 vs. PFAT 5.56 ± 0.73) and Day-2 (AS 3.33  ± 0.60 vs. PFAT 3.47  ± 0.79). No eye developed haze.  
Conclusions: After PRK, 20 % AS and PFAT yield comparable epithelial closure (~3 days) and 12-week visual outcomes. AS may reduce early postoperative pain, particularly in women, warranting larger paired-eye trials to confirm this signal.

Keywords:
  • Autologous Serum
  • Photorefractive Keratectomy
  • Artificial Tears
  • Epithelium
  • Healing
  • Pain
  • Postoperative
  • Mitomycin-C
  • pdf

How to Cite

Ahmadi , M., Rajavi, Z., & Mohammad Rebie , H. (2025). Comparison of the Effect of Autologous Serum versus Preservative-Free Artificial Tears after Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Contralateral-Eye Clinical Trial. Journal of Ophthalmic and Optometric Sciences, 9(3), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.22037/joos.v9i3.51181
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX

References

1. Ambrósio R Jr, Wilson S. LASIK vs. LASEK vs. PRK: advantages and indications. Semin Ophthalmol. 2003;18(1):2-10.

2. Hafezi F, Hillen M, Kollros L, Tan J, Awwad ST. A New Postoperative Regimen after CXL and PRK Using Topical NSAID and Steroids on the Open Ocular Surface. J Clin Med. 2022;11(14):4109.

3. Maurizi E, Adamo D, Magrelli FM, Galaverni G, Attico E, Merra A, et al. Regenerative Medicine of Epithelia: Lessons From the Past and Future Goals. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:652214.

4. van Setten GB, Tervo T, Tervo K, Tarkkanen A. Epidermal growth factor (EGF) in ocular fluids: presence, origin and therapeutical considerations. Acta Ophthalmol Suppl (1985). 1992;(202):54-9.

5. Rodeck U, Jost M, Kari C, Shih DT, Lavker RM, Ewert DL, et al. EGF-R dependent regulation of keratinocyte survival. J Cell Sci. 1997;110 ( Pt 2):113-21.

6. Lagnado R, King AJ, Donald F, Dua HS. A protocol for low contamination risk of autologous serum drops in the management of ocular surface disorders. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(4):464-5.

7. Poon AC, Geerling G, Dart JK, Fraenkel GE, Daniels JT. Autologous serum eyedrops for dry eyes and epithelial defects: clinical and in vitro toxicity studies. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85(10):1188-97.

8. Vazirani J, Sridhar U, Gokhale N, Doddigarla VR, Sharma S, Basu S. Autologous serum eye drops in dry eye disease: Preferred practice pattern guidelines. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023;71(4):1357-63.

9. Kruse FE, Tseng SC. Serum differentially modulates the clonal growth and differentiation of cultured limbal and corneal epithelium. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34(10):2976-89.

10. Lekhanont K, Jongkhajornpong P, Choubtum L, Chuckpaiwong V. Topical 100 % serum eye drops for treating corneal epithelial defect after ocular surgery. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:521315.

11. Esquenazi S, He J, Bazan HE, Bazan NG. Use of autologous serum in corneal epithelial defects post-lamellar surgery. Cornea. 2005;24(8):992-7.

12. Noda-Tsuruya T, Asano-Kato N, Toda I, Tsubota K. Autologous serum eye drops for dry eye after LASIK. J Refract Surg. 2006;22(1):61-6.

13. Hondur AM, Akcam HT, Karaca EE, Yazici Eroglu H, Aydin B. Autologous Serum Eye Drops Accelerate Epithelial Healing After LASEK. Curr Eye Res. 2016;41(1):15-9.

14. Yee RW, Yee SB. Update on laser subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK). Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004;15(4):333-41.

15. Hondur A, Bilgihan K, Cirak MY, Dogan O, Erdinc A, Hasanreisoglu B. Microbiologic study of soft contact lenses after laser subepithelial keratectomy for myopia. Eye Contact Lens. 2008;34(1):24-7.

  • Abstract Viewed: 29 times
  • pdf Downloaded: 34 times

Download Statastics

  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Plus
  • Telegram

Current Issue

  • Atom logo
  • RSS2 logo
  • RSS1 logo
  • Home
  • Archives
  • Submissions
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Team
  • Contact
Powered by OJSPlus