Search

AIM: To investigate cap morphology after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and its effects on intraocular scattering. METHODS: Sixty-five eyes of 33 patients undergoing SMILE were enrolled. In addition to regular evaluation, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography was used to investigate cap thickness at 1d, 1wk, 1 and 3mo postoperatively. The optical quality including modulation transfer function cutoff frequency, Strehl ratio, Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS) values, and objective scattering index (OSI), were evaluated using OQASTM. RESULTS: Cap thickness decreased from 1d to 1wk (P

AIM: To evaluate the effects of femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) to correct high myopic anisometropic amblyopia in juvenile patients. METHODS: From November 2013 to January 2015, 33 amblyopic patients with high myopic anisometropic amblyopia were studied. FS-LASIK (30 eyes) or SMILE (3 eyes) was performed in the amblyopic eyes. Visual acuity, refraction, contrast sensitivity, stereoacuity and complications were evaluated. Patients completed follow-up examinations at 3d, 1mo, 3mo and the last follow-up time (mean 8.17±3.23mo) after surgery. RESULTS: The mean age at surgery was 9.04±3.04y (range 6-16y). The mean spherical equivalent in the amblyopic eyes was significantly decreased from -10.00±2.39 D preoperatively to -0.06±1.06 D at 1mo, -0.19±1.33 D at 3mo and -0.60±1.43 D at approximately 8mo postoperatively (P

AIM: To identify possible differences of efficacy, safety, predictability, higher-order aberrations and corneal biomechnical parameters after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx). METHODS: A systematic literature retrieval was conducted in Medline，Embase and the Cochrane Library, up to October, 2015. The included studies were subject to a Meta-analysis. Comparison between SMILE and FLEx was measured as pooled odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD). Of 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to analyze data. RESULTS: A total of seven studies were included. Firstly, there were no differences in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) 20/20 or better (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.69 to 2.69; P=0.37) and logMAR UDVA (WMD, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.01; P=0.17) after SMILE versus FLEx. We found no differences in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) unchanged (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.46 to 2.11; P=0.97) and logMAR CDVA (WMD, -0.00; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.01; P=0.90) either. Secondly, we found no differences in refraction within ±1.00 D (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.13 to 7.28; P=0.99) and ±0.50 D (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.62 to 4.28; P=0.33) of target postoperatively. Thirdly, for higher-order aberrations, we found no differences in the total higher-order aberrations (WMD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.01; P=0.14), coma (WMD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.01; P=0.11), spherical (WMD, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.03; P=0.60) and trefoil (WMD, -0.00; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.03; P=0.76). Furthermore, for corneal biomechanical parameters, we also found no differences (WMD, 0.08; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.33; P=0.54) after SMILE versus FLEx. CONCLUSION: There are no statistically differences in efficacy, safety, predictability, higher-order aberrations and corneal biomechnical parameters postoperative between SMILE and FLEx.

AIM: To investigate the early changes in dry eye symptoms, tear function and ocular surface following small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for myopia. METHODS: Ninety-seven consecutive patients (193 eyes) who underwent SMILE for myopia were observed in this longitudinal and retrospective study. Parameters evaluated included: subjective dry eye symptoms (dryness, foreign body sensation and photophobia), tear film breakup time (TBUT), Schirmer Ⅰ test (SⅠT) without anesthesia, tear meniscus height (TMH) and corneal fluorescein staining. Each parameter was evaluated before, and subsequently at 1d, 1wk, 1 and 3mo after surgery. RESULTS: Compared with preoperative data, dryness was noted to be significantly increased at 1wk and 1mo postoperatively (P0.05). Conversely the corneal staining scores were higher than the preoperative data at 1d, 1wk and 1mo (P0.05). TBUT was significantly decreased at all postoperative time points (P

Aim: To examine differences in efficacy, accuracy, safety, aberrations and corneal biomechanical between Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx) for myopia., Methods: Comprehensive studies were conducted on the PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register before 31 July, 2015. Meta-analyses were performed on the primary outcomes [loss of ≥2 lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) ≥20/20, spherical equivalent (SE) within ±0.50 diopters (D), final refractive SE], secondary outcomes were high-order aberrations (HOAs) and corneal biomechanical [central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF)]., Results: Seven trials describing a total of 320 eyes with myopia were included in this Meta-analysis. No significant differences were found in the efficacy [UDVA weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.01; 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.01; P =0.37, UDVA ≥20/20, OR 1.49; 95%CI: 0.78 to 2.86; P =0.23], accuracy (SE WMD -0.03; 95%CI: -0.12 to 0.07; P =0.58, SE within ±0.5 D OR 1.25; 95%CI: 0.34 to 4.65; P =0.74), HOAs (WMD -0.04; 95%CI: -0.09 to 0.01; P =0.14) and CCT WMD 1.83; 95%CI: -7.07 to 10.72; P =0.69, CH WMD -0.01; 95%CI: -0.42 to 0.40; P =0.97, CRF WMD 0.17; 95%CI: -0.33 to 0.67; P =0.50) in the last fellow-up. But for safety, FLEx may achieve fewer CDVA lost two or more two lines (OR 11.11; 95%CI: 1.27 to 96.86; P =0.03) than SMILE, however CDVA (WMD 0.00; 95%CI: -0.03 to 0.02; P =0.77) is similar., Conclusion: SMILE and FLEx are comparable in terms of both efficacy, accuracy, aberrations and corneal biomechanical measures in the follow-up, but FLEx seems to be better in safety measures. The results should be interpreted cautiously since relevant evidence is still limited, although it is accumulating. Further large-scale, well-designed randomized controlled trials are urgently needed.