OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the intraoperative central corneal epithelial thickness (ET) as measured by optical coherence pachymetry (OCP) in myopic eyes undergoing alcohol-assisted photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent alcohol-assisted PRK was performed. Data were abstracted on age, gender, contact lens (CL) wear, preoperative refractive errors, keratometry, topographic and ultrasonic pachymetry, and intraoperative OCP measurements before and after epithelium removal. The central ET was calculated by subtracting OCP measurement after epithelium removal from the OCP measurement prior to epithelium removal.
RESULTS: The study comprised of 162 consecutive eyes from 81 patients. Mean age was 26.73 ± 6.47 years, 50.6% were males. CL was used in 92 eyes (56.8%). The mean sphere and spherical equivalent were -3.60 ± 1.84 D and -3.26 ± 1.85D, respectively. The mean intraoperative ET was 58.22 ± 17.53 µm (range, 15-121µm). Fifty-five percent of the eyes had an ET measurement above or below the range of 40-60µm. ET was significantly higher in the second operated eye compared to the first operated eye (p = 0.006), and an association was found to CL-wear (p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in thickness between genders (p = 0.62), and no correlation to patient age (p = 0.45, rp = 0.06), refractive errors (p > 0.30,rp=-0.07-0.08), nor keratometry(p > 0.80, rp=-0.01- (-0.02)).
CONCLUSIONS: The intraoperative assessment of ET in alcohol-assisted PRK showed a high variability of the central corneal epithelium, with a significant difference between the first and second operated eyes. This difference may have implications when the epithelium is not included in the surgical planning in surface ablation.

Purpose: To evaluate the difference between planned and measured central ablation depth (CAD) and compare the first and second operated eye in simultaneous bilateral myopic alcohol-assisted PRK. Methods: A retrospective review of patients was performed. Demographic and preoperative data was abstracted. Intraoperative assessment included environmental data, laser-planned algorithm of ablation (L-CAD), and optical coherence pachymetry (OCP) measurements. The true stromal ablation depth (O-CAD) was calculated by subtracting the immediate post-ablation OCP measurement from the OCP measurement before laser ablation. Deviation in pachymetry (DP) between O-CAD and L-CAD was also assessed. Results: The study comprised 140 eyes from 70 consecutive patients. The mean age was 26.91 ± 6.52 years, and 57.1% were females. O-CAD was significantly correlated to preoperative refractive errors and intraoperative laser settings. DP was not correlated to any of the pre- or intraoperative parameters. L-CAD showed a significant underestimation as compared to O-CAD (67.87 ± 25.42 µm and 77.05 ± 30.79 µm, respectively, p < 0.001), which was shown in 74.3% of the cases. A moderate agreement between the two methods was noted, with a mean deviation of 17%. This difference was maintained for each eye individually (p < 0.001). In addition, DP was significantly higher in the first operated eye as compared to the second operated eye (11.97 ± 16.3 µm and 6.38 ± 19.3 µm respectively, p = 0.04). Conclusion: The intraoperative assessment of stromal ablation showed significantly higher central ablation depth values compared to the laser-planned ablation algorithm. The deviation in pachymetry was higher in the first, compared to the second, operated eye. Awareness is warranted as to the discrepancy between preoperative planning and intraoperative assessment.