Simulated night vision after small-incision lenticule extraction

Femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis versus small-incision lenticule extraction: current approach based on evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Laser keratorefractive surgery achieves excellent visual outcomes for refractive error correction. With femtosecond laser, small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is an increasingly viable alternative to laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Comparative studies demonstrate similar efficacy and predictability between SMILE and LASIK, making it difficult for clinicians to choose which to use. This review thus compares femtosecond-LASIK (FS-LASK) and SMILE in various scenarios, to assist clinicians in deciding which refractive surgery procedure to recommend.

RECENT FINDINGS

SMILE may be superior for highly myopic eyes due to a smaller decrease in functional optical zone. SMILE further induces less spherical aberration and less overall higher order aberrations in mesopic conditions. SMIILE also has less postoperative dry eye, making it suitable those with preexisting dry eye. For low to moderate myopic astigmatism correction, FS-LASIK has less undercorrection compared to SMILE. Lastly, SMILE has not yet received Food and Drug Administration or Conformité Européenne approval for hyperopic correction, rendering FS-LASIK the choice of procedure for hyperopic correction.

SUMMARY

Both FS-LASIK and SMILE demonstrate good efficacy and predictability. Understanding specific clinical scenarios where one may be superior to the other will aid clinicians in choosing the most suitable procedure for personalized care.

Comparative Study of Primary SMILE, SMILE Enhancement, and Femtosecond Laser-Assisted LASIK on Higher Order Aberrations and Corneal Densitometry

PURPOSE

To compare differences in corneal densitometry (CD) and higher order aberrations (HOAs) in eyes that underwent small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism at postoperative months 3, 6, and 12, and to evaluate their changes in a separate cohort of eyes after SMILE enhancement.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, paired-eye clinical trial, consecutive eligible participants were randomized to undergo SMILE or FS-LASIK in either eye. Main outcome measures were CD and HOAs preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. A separate cohort of consecutive patients who had SMILE and underwent enhancement were also included for comparison.

RESULTS

For CD, no significant differences were found between SMILE and FS-LASIK up to month 12. For HOA measured by wavefront aberrometry, both SMILE and FS-LASIK had an increase in total root mean square (RMS) HOAs, spherical aberration (SA), and vertical coma up to month 12. SMILE had an additional increase in vertical quatrefoil, and FS-LASIK had an increase in horizontal coma at month 12. FS-LASIK had higher SA than SMILE, whereas SMILE had higher vertical quatrefoil than FS-LASIK at month 12. Central and posterior zone CD had significantly decreased after SMILE enhancement compared to after primary SMILE up to 2 years after enhancement. RMS HOAs, lower order aberrations, and SA were all increased after SMILE enhancement compared to after primary SMILE.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE induced lower SA but higher vertical quatrefoil than FS-LASIK at 1 year. Both SMILE and FS-LASIK had similar increases in RMS HOAs and vertical coma up to 1 year. There were no differences in CD between both groups. SMILE enhancement additionally had decreased central and posterior CD but greater RMS HOAs and SA compared to primary SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(5):e291-e303.].

TFOS Lifestyle: Impact of elective medications and procedures on the ocular surface

The word "elective" refers to medications and procedures undertaken by choice or with a lower grade of prioritization. Patients usually use elective medications or undergo elective procedures to treat pathologic conditions or for cosmetic enhancement, impacting their lifestyle positively and, thus, improving their quality of life. However, those interventions can affect the homeostasis of the tear film and ocular surface. Consequently, they generate signs and symptoms that could impair the patient's quality of life. This report describes the impact of elective topical and systemic medications and procedures on the ocular surface and the underlying mechanisms. Moreover, elective procedures performed for ocular diseases, cosmetic enhancement, and non-ophthalmic interventions, such as radiotherapy and bariatric surgery, are discussed. The report also evaluates significant anatomical and biological consequences of non-urgent interventions to the ocular surface, such as neuropathic and neurotrophic keratopathies. Besides that, it provides an overview of the prophylaxis and management of pathological conditions resulting from the studied interventions and suggests areas for future research. The report also contains a systematic review investigating the quality of life among people who have undergone small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Overall, SMILE refractive surgery seems to cause more vision disturbances than LASIK in the first month post-surgery, but less dry eye symptoms in long-term follow up.

Comparison of Postoperative Safety, Efficacy, and Visual Quality after SMILE for Myopic Patients with Different Corneal Thicknesses

PURPOSE

To investigate the safety, efficacy, and visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in different corneal thickness patients with myopia or myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 191 right eyes of 191 patients. Eyes were divided into three groups according to preoperative central corneal thickness (CCT) (Preoperative central corneal thickness (CCT) was the group indicator.) There were 31 eyes in the thin cornea group (CCT ≤500 um (μm), TC), 94 eyes in the moderate corneal thickness group (CCT ≥501 um (μm) and ≤550 um (μm), MD) and 66 eyes in the thick cornea group (CCT ≥550 um (μm), TK). Comparisons in uncorrected (UDVA) and best-corrected distance visual acuity (BDVA), manifest refractive spherical equivalent (SE), preoperative mesopic/photopic contrast sensitivity (CS), ocular higher-order aberrations (HOAs) at a 6mm analytical pupil diameter, and visual quality questionnaires were made (performed) among the three groups during the postoperative six months. Subgroup analyses were made based on preoperative SE.

RESULTS

The safety indices at six months were 1.15 ± 0.18, 1.14 ± 0.17, and 1.18 ± 0.17, respectively (p = 0.374), and the efficacy indices at six months were 1.07 ± 0.25, 1.12 ± 0.22, and 1.11 ± 0.21, respectively (p = 0.599). The postoperative SE was -0.07 ± 0.52D, -0.14 ± 0.38D, and -0.05 ± 0.46D after SMILE in the three groups, respectively (p = 0.376). No significant difference was found in mesopic/photopic CS, HOAs, and visual quality among different corneal thickness groups and SE groups. Postoperative SE and efficacy indices were the lowest in thin cornea eyes with ultra-high myopia (over -9.00 D).

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE provides comparable safety, efficacy, and visual quality results in different corneal thickness patients. Those with myopia higher than -9.00 D had less efficacy after surgery, especially in thin cornea patients.

Small-incision lenticule extraction in the U.S. military: prospective study of visual and military task performance

PURPOSE

To assess early visual outcomes and military task performance after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) among U.S. military service members.

SETTING

Warfighter Refractive Eye Surgery Program and Research Center and Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

DESIGN

Single-center, prospective, observational study.

METHODS

The study was composed of active duty service members (n = 37) electing to undergo SMILE for myopia or myopic astigmatism. Testing performed preoperatively and at 1 month and 3 months postoperatively included uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, wavefront aberrometry, low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA), contrast sensitivity, and vision-related questionnaire. 14 participants underwent rifle marksmanship with spectacle correction before and without correction at 6 to 8 weeks postoperatively.

RESULTS

At 3 months postoperatively, the efficacy index was 0.96 and the safety index was 1.03. UDVA was ≥20/20 in 69 (96%) of eyes. LCVA change from baseline was significant under night vision condition. Eye problems contributed to 10% work and 20% activity impairments, both of which decreased to 0% (P = .001). The overall satisfaction rating for SMILE was high at 90.9 (95% CI, 85.3 to 96.5), and 95% of participants would be willing to undergo the procedure again. The median scores between preoperative and 6 to 8 weeks postoperative firing performance were comparable (34 vs 35, with and without correction, respectively; P = .247).

CONCLUSIONS

After the early recovery period, SMILE seems to preserve quality of vision, which appears to facilitate the accomplishment of tasks related to their work as military service members as well as performing activities outside of work.

Nighttime Symptoms After Monocular SMILE: A Contralateral Eye Study

Introduction

To investigate nighttime symptoms in patients with myopic anisometropia after monocular small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery.

Methods

Thirty-six patients who had undergone monocular SMILE more than 6 months previously were recruited at the Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University. The average age at surgery was 25.4 ± 6.1 years. Preoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was −3.77 ± 1.56 D in SMILE-treated eyes and −0.08 ± 0.66 D in unoperated eyes. Main measurements included uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, halo radius, contrast sensitivity, nighttime symptoms, and patient satisfaction.

Results

The mean follow-up time was 13.9 ± 3.4 months. The efficacy and safety indexes were 1.18 and 1.28, respectively. The halo radius was not significantly different between SMILE-treated and unoperated eyes under luminance conditions of 1, 5, and 100 cd/m² (P = 0.055). No significant differences were observed in contrast sensitivity at all spatial frequencies between eyes under both uncorrected and corrected conditions (all P > 0.05). None of the patients reported moderate or severe symptoms at night. Mild symptoms (glare, halo, starburst) were reported and binocularly equal in 13 patients, whereas four patients reported better night vision in SMILE-treated eyes than unoperated eyes, and one of them experienced mild night vision disturbance. The overall satisfaction score was 9.39 ± 0.80.

Conclusions

The disk halo size and contrast sensitivity in SMILE-treated eyes were similar to those in unoperated eyes, and nighttime symptoms almost completely resolved after SMILE.

Advances in refractive corneal lenticule extraction

Refractive errors are the leading cause of reversible visual impairment worldwide. In addition to the desired spectacle independence, refractive procedures can improve quality of life, working ability, and daily working performance. Refractive corneal lenticule extraction (RCLE) is a relatively new technique, dependent only on a femtosecond laser (FS). This leads to potential benefits over laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) including a quicker recovery of dry eye disease, a larger functional optical zone, and no flap-related complications. SMILE, available with the VisuMax FS (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany), is the most established RCLE application, offering visual and refractive outcomes comparable to LASIK. SmartSight (SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions GmbH, Kleinostheim, Germany) and CLEAR (Ziemer Ophthalmic Systems AG, Port, Switzerland) are two new RCLE applications that received Conformité Européenne (CE) approval in 2020. In this article, we review refractive and visual outcomes, advantages, and disadvantages of RCLE and also report on the latest advances in RCLE systems.

Refractive outcomes comparing small-incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis for high myopia

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term refractive effects of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) on the correction of high myopia and astigmatism.

SETTING

The Eye and ENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Patients had SMILE or FS-LASIK for high myopia. Subgroup analyses of high myopia (-6.00 to -8.75 diopters [D]) and extremely high myopia (≥-9.00 D) were performed. The main outcome measure was refractive predictability, compared between SMILE and FS-LASIK groups. Secondary outcomes included efficacy, safety, and residual astigmatism.

RESULTS

This study included 121 patients (121 eyes: 75 in the SMILE group and 46 in the FS-LASIK group). No differences were found in terms of refractive predictability between SMILE and FS-LASIK in eyes with high myopia: 56% vs 58.7% achieved ± 0.50 D of attempted correction (P = .771) and 81.3% vs 76.1% achieved ± 1.00 D of attempted correction (P = .489). Efficacy indices of the SMILE and FS-LASIK groups were 1.02 ± 0.24 and 1.03 ± 0.24 (P = .742), respectively; safety indices were 1.23 ± 0.22 and 1.20 ± 0.24 (P = .324), respectively. Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution uncorrected distance visual acuity and spherical equivalent in the high myopia subgroup were better than in the extremely high myopia subgroup after both SMILE and FS-LASIK (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE and FS-LASIK were both effective in correcting high myopia and myopic astigmatism. However, both techniques may require further nomogram adjustments when treating eyes with extremely high myopia.

Refractive surgery beyond 2020

Refractive surgery refers to any procedure that corrects or minimizes refractive errors. Today, refractive surgery has evolved beyond the traditional laser refractive surgery, embodied by the popular laser in situ keratomileusis or 'LASIK'. New keratorefractive techniques such as small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) avoids corneal flap creation and uses a single laser device, while advances in surface ablation techniques have seen a resurgence in its popularity. Presbyopic treatment options have also expanded to include new ablation profiles, intracorneal implants, and phakic intraocular implants. With the improved safety and efficacy of refractive lens exchange, a wider variety of intraocular lens implants with advanced optics provide more options for refractive correction in carefully selected patients. In this review, we also discuss possible developments in refractive surgery beyond 2020, such as preoperative evaluation of refractive patients using machine learning and artificial intelligence, potential use of stromal lenticules harvested from SMILE for presbyopic treatments, and various advances in intraocular lens implants that may provide a closer to 'physiological correction' of refractive errors.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes of Laser In Situ Keratomileusis and Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction: A Review

PURPOSE

Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) are popular refractive surgeries. The objective refractive outcomes of LASIK and SMILE have been studied extensively; both procedures have comparable safety, efficacy, and predictability. However, owing to various psychosocial factors, refractive patients may report dissatisfaction despite good postoperative vision. Hence the importance of studies on subjective patient-reported outcomes. This review discusses the role of psychometric-technique-based validated questionnaires when evaluating subjective outcomes. It also summarizes the literature on patient-reported outcomes for LASIK and SMILE.

DESIGN

A literature search was performed on PubMed database to identify studies that have assessed patient-reported outcomes for LASIK and SMILE.

RESULTS

Several studies have looked into patient-reported outcome measures for LASIK, but the number of equivalent studies for SMILE is limited. Questionnaires (validated and non-validated) are used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Validated questionnaires are designed based on psychometric techniques, such as Classic Test Theory, Item Response Theory, and Rasch analysis. The Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction (QIRC) questionnaire, a validated questionnaire administered to both LASIK and SMILE patients, suggests that both groups have comparable vision-related quality of life in the first few months postoperatively; but SMILE might confer a slight advantage in the later postoperative period (postoperative month 6).

CONCLUSIONS

Future LASIK-SMILE comparative studies utilizing standardized validated questionnaires for patient-reported outcome measures with longer follow-up durations would be a welcome contribution to this important aspect of refractive surgery.

Refractive surgery

Refractive surgery has evolved beyond laser refractive techniques over the past decade. Laser refractive surgery procedures (such as laser in-situ keratomileusis), surface ablation techniques (such as laser epithelial keratomileusis), and photorefractive keratectomy have now been established as fairly safe procedures that produce excellent visual outcomes for patients with low-to-moderate amounts of ametropia. Additionally, a broader selection of options are now available to treat a wider range of refractive errors. Small incision lenticule extraction uses a femtosecond laser to shape a refractive lenticule, which is removed through a small wound. The potential advantages of this procedure include greater tectonic strength and less dry eye. In the future, intracorneal implants could be used to treat hyperopia or presbyopia. Phakic intraocular implants and refractive lens exchange might be useful options in carefully selected patients for correcting high degrees of ametropia. Thus, physicians are now able to provide patients with the appropriate refractive corrective option based on the individual's risk-benefit profile.