Vector analysis of astigmatic changes after small-incision lenticule extraction and wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

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.

Effect of Cyclotorsion Compensation in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery for the Correction of Myopic Astigmatism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) has made notable advancements in addressing myopic astigmatism. Nevertheless, the potential impact of cyclotorsion on surgical outcomes cannot be overlooked. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of cyclotorsion compensation technology in SMILE surgery for the correction of myopic astigmatism, examining its influence on postoperative visual quality.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. A comprehensive literature search was performed using databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, Scopus, CNKI, VIP, and Wan Fang. Studies meeting the criteria were selected and included. Data were independently extracted by three authors. Clinical outcome parameters were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.3.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included ten studies. The results showed that, compared with the control group (cyclotorsion compensation was not performed in SMILE), the following indicators in the cyclotorsion compensation group were: residual astigmatism (RA) [weighted mean difference (MD) = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) + 0.26 to + 1.19, P = 0.002], spherical equivalent (SE) (MD = 1.99, 95% CI + 0.77 to + 3.21, P = 0.001), coma (MD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.04, P < 0.00001), higher-order aberrations (HOAs) (MD = -0.04, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.02, P < 0.0001), follow-up 6-month angle of error (AE) (MD = -2.67, 95% CI -3.71 to -1.63, P < 0.00001), and follow-up 6-month uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) (MD = -0.05, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.01, P = 0.005), and the differences in results were statistically significant. However, the differences among correction index, index of success (IOS), targeted induced astigmatism (TIA), magnitude of error (ME), and spherical aberration (SA) were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Cyclotorsion compensation proves to be effective and predictable for correcting myopic astigmatism. The cyclotorsion compensation group demonstrated advantages over the control group in terms of postoperative residual astigmatism, and it induced fewer coma aberrations. Whether cyclotorsion compensation can lead to better visual quality remains to be seen, and further research on correcting myopic astigmatism through cyclotorsion compensation is warranted.

Clinical outcomes of SMILE and WFG-LASIK used to treat myopia and astigmatism: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, efficacy and postoperative visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and Wavefront-Guided Laser in situ keratomileusis (WFG-LASIK) and to analyze their efficacy in correcting astigmatism.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. RevMan software version 5.3.0 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 976 eyes were included in 8 studies, of which 539 eyes underwent SMILE and 437 eyes underwent WFG-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better (P=0.18), the proportion of eyes within±0.50 diopter of target refraction postoperatively (P=0.10), or the postoperative magnitude of cylinder (P=0.10). Regarding the Alpins vector analysis of astigmatism, there was no statistically significant difference in the surgical magnitude of error (P=0.09) between the two groups. WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error (P= 0.002) and higher surgical correction index of cylinder (P=0.03) than SMILE. In terms of aberrations, higher order aberrations (P=0.46), spherical aberrations (P=0.22) and trefoil (P=0.56) were not statistically different, while WFG-LASIK induced less coma than SMILE surgery (P=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Both SMILE and WFG-LASIK are safe and effective ways to correct myopia and astigmatism. Compared with SMILE, WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error, higher surgical correction index of cylinder and induces less coma.

Impact of the preoperative cylinder on astigmatism correction in femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEX): a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

To explore the impact of the preoperative manifest cylinder on astigmatism correction via femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEX), or small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study. Eyes were categorized into mild (n = 88), moderate (n = 46), and severe (n = 53) astigmatism groups, based on the preoperative manifest cylinder. Vector analysis was conducted with the back vertex distance set at 12 mm. The primary outcome was the correction index (CI), with secondary outcomes including the safety, efficacy, predictability, and vectoral alterations related to FLEX.

RESULTS

The average target-induced astigmatism was 0.45 ± 0.20 D, 0.95 ± 0.17 D, and 1.99 ± 0.65 D in the three groups (P < 0.001), and the average CI was 1.12± 0.05, 1.01 ± 0.03, and 0.95 ± 0.02 (P = 0.020), with the severe astigmatism group displaying a notably lower CI. The efficacy, safety, predictability, or stability of FLEX did not demonstrate any significant differences among the three groups. The CIs exhibited a significant difference in eyes with with-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism and against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism from the mild to severe astigmatism group. In eyes with oblique astigmatism, the average CI exceeded one.

CONCLUSION

Patients with manifest cylinder exceeding 1.25 D have a heightened risk of under-correction in WTR and ATR astigmatism compared to those with mild astigmatism, and mild over-correction may occur in cases of oblique astigmatism.

Comparison of myopic astigmatic correction after cross-assisted SMILE, FS-LASIK, and transPRK

PURPOSE

To compare astigmatic correction among cross-assisted small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (transPRK).

SETTING

The Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Zhejiang, China.

DESIGN

Prospective comparison study.

METHODS

154 right eyes of 154 patients with astigmatism of -1.00 to -2.75 diopters (D) were included in this study. 64 eyes, 42 eyes, and 48 eyes were receiving SMILE, FS-LASIK, and transPRK, respectively. The SMILE group used cross-axial alignment for head positioning for astigmatism correction. In the FS-LASIK and transPRK groups, static and dynamic cyclotorsion control were used. Changes in ocular parameters and vector analysis were assessed at 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The safety and efficacy indices were comparable among the 3 groups at 6 months postoperatively. Residual astigmatism was smallest in the SMILE group (-0.23 ± 0.25 D) compared with that in FS-LASIK (-0.40 ± 0.28 D, P = .009) and transPRK groups (-0.42 ± 0.32 D, P = .001). 53 (82.8%), 36 (85.7%), and 37 (77.1%) eyes achieved an angle of error within ±5 degrees, respectively ( P = .55). Notably, vector analysis showed that the difference vector, the magnitude of the error, and its absolute value were significantly smaller in the SMILE group than those in the other groups ( P < .05). In addition, the higher-order aberrations, especially coma, were significantly induced postoperatively in each group ( P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Residual astigmatism magnitude was smallest by cross-assisted SMILE, followed by FS-LASIK and transPRK, and the astigmatism axial correction was comparable among groups.

Subjective patient-reported visual quality after small-incision lenticule extraction and its correlation to the objective one

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to characterize the subjective visual quality and satisfaction following small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and to identify its influential factors.

SETTING

Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational study.

METHODS

Patients who had simultaneous binocular SMILE for myopia and myopic astigmatism were included 6 months postoperatively, and the patient-reported outcome questionnaire was employed for the assessment of visual quality in real-life situations. Examinations with SIRIUS combined corneal topography and tomography were performed including the parameters of Strehl ratio (SR), corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) within 6.0-mm area, kappa angel, and thinnest corneal thickness. Decentration and effective optical zone (EOZ) were measured based on a tangential pre-post-operation difference map. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed for predictors of patient-reported visual quality.

RESULTS

Clinical data from 97 cases were analyzed retrospectively. Overall satisfaction was 96.91% (94/97). Fluctuation in vision and glare is the most frequent and dominant visual symptoms. SR value increased non-significantly compared with preoperative (P> 0.05). A statistically significant (P < 0.05) increase in total HOAs, spherical aberration, and coma was noted. SR and HOAs were not correlated with the degree of visual symptoms (P > 0.05). No objective parameter was found to be associated with patient-reported visual quality after SMILE (P> 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The high patient-reported satisfaction confirmed the ideal effect on visual quality following SMILE in real-life situations, though some objective optical performances were not satisfying. It is very tolerant toward patients' conditions and mild deviations, and this study did not find factors affecting visual performances.

12-Month Outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction With Proper Head Positioning but No Reference Marking for the Correction of Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To investigate the 12-month outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with proper head positioning but no reference marking for correcting astigmatism.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 3,541 patients (5,953 eyes) who underwent SMILE between July 2010 and April 2021. Patient positioning on the treatment bed was meticulously done in every patient to avoid face turn, head tilt, and chin-up or chin-down posture. The corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), manifest refraction, astigmatic outcomes, and adverse events were evaluated at 1, 3, and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative manifest spherical equivalent and manifest cylinder were -5.15 ± 2.24 diopters (D) (range: -0.13 to -12.88 D) and -1.00 ± 0.77 D (range: -0.25 and -6.00 D), respectively. Of all eyes, 88.4% and 98.6% had the spherical equivalent within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D of emmetropia at 12 months. The percentage of eyes with UDVA of 20/20 or better was 92.5%. Six eyes (0.1%) lost two or more lines of CDVA at the 12-month visit. The predictability of cylinder correction was excellent, with 88.1% within ±0.50 D and 98.9% within ± 1.00 D of astigmatism correction at 12 months. The mean correction index (CI) at 12 months was 1.09 ± 0.45 (range: 0.17 to 4.99), indicating a slight astigmatism overcorrection. The high cylinder group tended to have undercorrection with greater residual astigmatism, whereas the low cylinder group was likely to have overcorrection with lesser residual astigmatism (P < .001). No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE with proper head positioning but no reference marking produces safe, efficient, predictable, and stable outcomes for astigmatism correction over a 12-month period. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(10):683-692.].

Comparative analysis of visual outcomes following small-incision lenticule extraction with or without cyclotorsion compensation in eyes with high astigmatism: Contralateral eye study

Purpose

To compare the visual outcomes in patients undergoing small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of myopic astigmatism (≥-1.50 D) with or without manual cyclotorsion compensation.

Methods

A prospective, double-blinded, randomized, contralateral study was conducted in the refractive services of a tertiary eye care center. Eligible patients with bilateral high myopic astigmatism (≥1.5 D) and intraoperative cyclotorsion (≥5°) undergoing SMILE between June 2018 and May 2019 were included. Cyclotorsion compensation was performed using triple centration method before femtosecond laser delivery. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA, respectively) measurement, manifest refraction, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, and corneal tomography were performed preoperatively and at 1 and 3 months' postoperative visit. Astigmatic outcomes were analyzed using Alpins criteria.

Results

A total of 30 patients (60 eyes) were included in this study. The patients underwent bilateral SMILE surgery, with manual cyclotorsion compensation in one eye (CC group, n = 30 eyes) and no cyclotorsion compensation in the other eye (NCC group, n = 30 eyes). Preoperative astigmatism and intraoperative cyclotorsion were -2.0 D and 7.03° ± 1.06° (CC) and -1.75 D and 7.24° ± 0.98° (NCC) (P = 0.472 and 0.240, respectively). No significant differences were noted in mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), UDVA, CDVA, and refractive error between the two groups at 3 months' postoperative visit. Astigmatic outcomes measured using Alpins criteria demonstrated no significant difference between the two cohorts.

Conclusion

The cyclotorsion compensation technique provided no additional advantage in terms of astigmatic outcomes or postoperative visual quality, in eyes with high preoperative astigmatism and intraoperative cyclotorsion.

Design and Conduct of Randomized Clinical Trials Evaluating Surgical Innovations in Ophthalmology: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Surgical innovations are necessary to improve patient care. After an initial exploratory phase, novel surgical technique should be compared with alternative options or standard care in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, surgical RCTs have unique methodological challenges. Our study sought to investigate key aspects of the design, conduct, and reporting of RCTs of novel surgeries.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021253297). RCTs evaluating novel surgeries for cataract, vitreoretinal, glaucoma, and corneal diseases were included. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. The search period was January 1, 2016, to June 16, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 52 ophthalmic surgery RCTs were identified in the fields of glaucoma (n = 12), vitreoretinal surgery (n = 5), cataract (n = 19), and cornea (n = 16). A description defining the surgeon's experience or level of expertise was reported in 30 RCTs (57%) and was presented in both control and intervention groups in 11 (21%). Specification of the number of cases performed in the particular surgical innovation being assessed prior to the trial was reported in 10 RCTs (19%) and an evaluation of quality of the surgical intervention in 7 (13%). Prospective trial registration was recorded in 12 RCTs (23%) and retrospective registration in 13 (25%); and there was no registration record in the remaining 28 (53%) studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Important aspects of the study design such as the surgical learning curve, surgeon's previous experience, quality assurance, and trial registration details were often missing in novel ophthalmic surgical procedures. The Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) framework aims to improve the quality of study design.

Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) Versus Laser Assisted Stromal In Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) for Astigmatism Corrections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and laser assisted stromal in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for astigmatism correction.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis METHODS: We reviewed published studies comparing outcomes after LASIK and SMILE for astigmatism correction by querying PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science, with a cut-off date of September 3, 2022. We also compared the changes in visual acuity, refraction, and high-order aberrations between the surgeries. Astigmatism correction outcomes in the low-to-moderate group (less than or equal to -2.00 D) and high group (greater than -2.00 D) were evaluated using vector analysis. The Cochrane risk of bias tool in RevMan software was used for randomized studies (RCT), and Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) was used for the nonrandomized studies (NRSs).

RESULTS

There were 17 studies (5 randomized studies and 12 cohort studies), including 1,985 eyes. A statistically significant difference was found in the correction index (mean difference [MD] = -0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.04 to -0.01, P =0.01), although there was no significant difference in the index of success (MD = 0.01, 95% CI = -0.03 to 0.05, P =0.51), different vector (MD = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.00 to 0.13, P =0.04), and angle of error (MD = 0.56, 95% CI = -0.34 to 1.45, P =0.22) between SMILE and LASIK. However, for low-to-moderate astigmatism correction, SMILE exhibited a smaller correction index (MD = -0.08, 95% CI= -0.13 to -0.02, P =0.008) and a larger difference vector (MD = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.09 to 0.27, P <0.0001) than LASIK. There was no significant difference between the different procedures in visual acuity and refraction (spherical equivalent: MD = -0.04, 95% CI = -0.08 to 0.01, P =0.15) or high-order aberration (MD = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.07 to 0.04, P =0.67), except spherical aberration (MD = -0.12, 95% CI = -0.23 to -0.01, P =0.04). The risk of bias was moderate in most studies because of poor reporting of several bias domains for RCTs, and because of confounding and selective outcome reporting for NRSs.

CONCLUSIONS

When used to treat severe astigmatism, both SMILE and LASIK provide effective and predictable results and generally have equivalent outcomes. However, evidence reveals a tendency toward undercorrection in the SMILE groups for astigmatism correction. In addition, LASIK has a greater probability of causing postoperative spherical aberration.

Evaluation of the Effects of Myopic Astigmatism Correction and Anterior Corneal Curvature on Functional Optical Zone After SMILE

PURPOSE

To evaluate the influence of different degrees of myopic astigmatism correction and preoperative anterior corneal curvature on the functional optical zone (FOZ) following small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 68 patients (106 eyes) treated with SMILE were grouped according to myopic astigmatism correction: control (0.00 diopters [D]), moderate astigmatism (-0.50 to -2.00 D), and high astigmatism (> -2.00 D). The FOZ was measured and compared between the three groups for 3 months. Correlations between attempted correction, anterior corneal curvature, corneal aberrations, and the FOZ were analyzed.

RESULTS

The preoperative mean treatment spherical equivalent was comparable among the three groups. The average FOZ was 5.06 ± 0.24 mm in the control group, 5.19 ± 0.25 mm in the moderate astigmatism group, and 5.35 ± 0.20 mm in the high astigmatism group The FOZ showed statistically significant differences among the three groups (P < .001), particularly between the high astigmatism group and the other two groups (P < .001 and .018). Correlation analysis showed that the total higher order aberrations, coma, and spherical aberration change were correlated with the FOZ (P < .001). Preoperative steep keratometry, average keratometry, and corneal astigmatism were significantly correlated with the FOZ (P < .05). The correlation remained after excluding the influence of attempted correction on the FOZ (P < .05). After adjusting for other risk factors using multiple linear regression analysis, there was still a significant positive association between preoperative steep keratometry and the FOZ (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with higher myopic astigmatism achieved a larger FOZ and less induced horizontal coma than the control and moderate astigmatism groups. A larger FOZ after SMILE can be achieved in eyes with steeper keratometry. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(2):135-141.].

Efficacy of small-incision lenticule extraction surgery in high astigmatism: A meta-analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in improving vision and visual quality and correcting astigmatism for the treatment of high astigmatism.

Methods

Eligible studies and studies comparing the efficacy of SMILE with femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) or transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (T-PRK) for high astigmatism (≥2.00 D) were identified in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, searched from their inception to 29 May 2022. The references of all searched studies were checked as supplements. The risk of bias was evaluated for each eligible study. The literature was screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and relative data were extracted. Data were extracted and analyzed by ReviewManager 5.4. The primary outcome was post-operative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA). The secondary outcomes included corneal aberrations and vector parameters. The weight mean difference (WMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to assess the strength of the association.

Results

A total of six studies including 380 astigmatism eyes were involved, with 211 high-astigmatism eyes and 31 low-astigmatism eyes undergoing SMILE surgery, 94 high-astigmatism eyes undergoing FS-LASIK surgery, and 44 high-astigmatism eyes undergoing T-PRK surgery. Compared with non-SMILE, SMILE induced more astigmatism (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.07, 95% CI [-0.12 to -0.02], P = 0.005) and fewer sphere aberrations (WMD = -0.12, 95% CI [-0.17 to -0.08], P < 0.00001). The post-operative UDVA, sphere, spherical equivalent (SE), and higher order aberrations in different surgeries were likewise equivalent. The difference vector and index of success were significantly higher, and the surgically induced astigmatism vector, correction index, and magnitude of error were significantly lower in SMILE.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that SMILE, FS-LASIK, and T-PRK show excellent efficacy, predictability, and safety for myopia. SMILE exhibited less astigmatism refraction predictability and less surgically induced spherical aberrations. There may be more under-correction in SMILE. More randomized, prospective, and large sample-sized studies are needed to confirm these conclusions in the long term.

Comparison of objective and subjective visual quality after flapless laser vision correction for mild to moderate myopia: SMILE vs PRK

PURPOSE

To investigate the differences in surgical results and the objective and subjective quality of vision (QoV) of patients after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) versus alcohol-assisted photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

METHODS

Medical records of patients treated with SMILE and PRK were retrospectively examined. Visual quality, biometric parameters, Strehl ratio (SR), and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) within a 6.0 mm area were recorded. The effective optical zone (EOZ) and decentration were measured using a tangential pre-post operation difference map. Subjective QoV and operation satisfaction were evaluated 6 months postoperatively using the Quality of Vision questionnaire.

RESULTS

The study comprised 100 eyes treated with SMILE (preoperative mean spherical equivalent (SE), - 4.52 ± 0.81 dioptres (D)) and 69 eyes with PRK (mean SE, - 4.21 ± 1.25 D). Six months postoperatively, the EOZ reduction was significantly larger in the PRK group (P < 0.001). Decentrations were comparable between the groups. Regarding visual symptoms, monocular diplopia was more common following PRK (P = 0.02), and 98 (98.00%) SMILE-treated and 67 (97.10%) PRK-treated patients were satisfied with the QoV. Both groups demonstrated significant increases in total HOAs, coma, and spherical aberration (SA) at 6 months postoperatively compared to preoperatively (P < 0.001); these values were significantly higher in the PRK (P < 0.05) compared to the SMILE group. SR increased significantly only in the PRK group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although EOZ was more consistent with anticipated treatment and HOAs were fewer in SMILE, high patient-reported satisfaction and good corneal optical quality were achieved in both groups, indicating that both SMILE and alcohol-assisted PRK are excellent options for mild to moderate myopia correction.

SMILE after DALK to reduce residual refraction: two-year results

PURPOSE

To determine the two-year results of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correcting post-keratoplasty myopia and myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

In this case-series study, 10 eyes of 10 patients with a 6- to 10-year history of successful deep lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) underwent SMILE using the VisuMax laser platform. Ophthalmologic examinations and visual acuity and refraction measurement were taken pre- and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The Pentacam and Sirius imaging were done in the first and last follow-up sessions.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 39.60 ± 7.86 years. Six subjects were male. Two years after SMILE, the mean improvement in UDVA and CDVA was 3.60 ± 1.84 (P < 0.001) and 1.60 ± 2.91 (P = 0.231) LogMAR, respectively. The mean decrease in spherical equivalent, spherical error, and cylinder power was 1.92 ± 1.96 diopter (D) (P = 0.013), 0.70 ± 3.05D (P = 0.213), and 2.42 ± 2.91D (P = 0.024), respectively. The vector mean target-induced astigmatism, surgical-induced astigmatism, and difference vector were 1.30D@44˚, 1.11D@24˚, and 0.86D@73˚, respectively. Two years after SMILE, vertical coma, horizontal coma, and spherical aberration increased by 0.44 ± 0.51, 0.23 ± 0.32, and 0.02 ± 0.16 µm, respectively, (all P > 0.05) while trefoil reduced by 0.29 ± 0.75 µm (P = 0.428).

CONCLUSION

SMILE can be an effective procedure for reducing refraction and astigmatism after DALK in patients with moderate myopia and moderate to severe astigmatism and improves the visual acuity in these patients. Axis rotation during surgery may result in under-correction of astigmatism. Refinement of SMILE treatment nomogram for post-DALK cases seems necessary.

Vector analysis of high astigmatism (≥ 2.0 diopters) correction after small-incision lenticule extraction with stringent head positioning and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis with compensation of cyclotorsion

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the astigmatic correction by vector analysis in patients with high myopic astigmatism after femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) with cyclotorsion compensation or small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with stringent head positioning.

Setting

Beijing Aier-Intech Eye Hospital, Beijing, China.

Design

A retrospective case series.

Methods

Patients who had correction of myopic astigmatism of 2 diopters (D) or more treated with either FS-LASIK with cyclotorsion compensation or SMILE with stringent head positioning were included. The results of vision and refraction were analyzed and compared between groups with the right eye.

Results

The study enrolled 94 patients (41eyes in an FS-LASIK with compensation of cyclotorsion group and 53 eyes in a SMILE with stringent head positioning control group. The mean preoperative manifest cylinder was -2.65 ± 0.77D in the FS-LASIK group and 2.51 ± 0.56D in the SMILE group (P = 0.302). At 12 months, there was no significant between-group difference in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, P = 0.274) and postoperative spherical equivalent (SEQ) (P = 0.107). 46.3% and 24.5% of eyes in the FS-LASIK and SMILE groups were within 0.25 D were within 0.25D postoperative cylinder, respectively, and 78% and 66% of eyes in these two groups were within 0.5 D postoperative cylinder (P = 0.027, P = 0.202). The vector analysis showed comparable between-group target-induced astigmatism (TIA) (P = 0.114), surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) (P = 0.057), difference vector (DV, P = 0.069), and the angle of error (AE) (P = 0 .213) values. The index of success (IOS) was 0.18 in the FS-LASIK group and 0.24 in the SMILE group (P = 0.024), with a significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusion

FS-LASIK with compensation of cyclotorsion showed a favorable correction of high myopic astigmatism (≥ 2.0 D) compared to SMILE with stringent head positioning at 12 months.

Vector analysis of moderate to high myopic astigmatism after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE): 12-month follow-up

PURPOSE

To evaluate the refractive outcomes of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery in moderate to high myopic astigmatism.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective interventional case series.

METHODS

This study evaluated 111 eyes of 68 patients treated with femtosecond SMILE surgery for the correction of myopia and astigmatism. Inclusion criteria were myopia of - 0.5 D or more and astigmatism between - 1.0 D and -5.0 D. Refractive and visual measurements were obtained preoperatively, 1 and 12 month(s) postoperatively. Vector analysis was used to study the astigmatic outcomes at 12-month follow-up. Comparison of results in two groups of patients with astigmatism below and over 3.00 D was performed.

RESULTS

The preoperative mean spherical equivalent was -5.48 ± 2.17 D (range - 1.75 to - 10.00 D) and the mean cylinder was -2.02 ± 1.09 D (range - 1.00 to - 5.00 D). The mean postoperative cylinder value was -0.60 ± 0.52 D at 12-month visit. The 12-month safety and efficacy indices were 0.98 ± 0.07 and 0.97 ± 0.12, respectively. The high astigmatism group showed significantly lower safety and efficacy indices. The postoperative residual astigmatism was 0.5 D or less in 73% of the eyes. Higher amount of residual astigmatism was observed in the high astigmatism group. The angle of error was ± 5 degrees in 49% and ± 15 degrees in 87% of the eyes.

CONCLUSION

SMILE surgery is effective and safe method for correcting myopic astigmatism. Vector analysis indicated a tendency for the under correction of astigmatism in subjects with high astigmatism.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of LASIK, Trans-PRK, and SMILE for correction of myopia

Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (Trans-PRK), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) are three mainstay refractive surgeries worldwide. The applicability, efficacy, safety, and predictability of these different techniques are quite similar. Trans-PRK has the strongest biostability, earliest return to normal corneal sensitivity but the longest recovery time, most uncomfortable postoperative experience, and possibility of corneal haze. LASIK possesses the fastest visual rehabilitation but the slowest corneal nerve reinnervation, and flap displacement is possibly lifelong. SMILE incurs no flap-related complications and has intermediate vision recovery time and biomechanics compared with Trans-PRK and LASIK. However, it lacks the cyclotorsion-compensation system, eye-tracking system, and customized treatment profile for high astigmatism or irregular corneal surface. This review aims to introduce the mechanisms, pros, and cons of these three types of refractive surgery. With full understanding, practitioners could advise patients on the most suitable treatment of choice.

Comparative study of small-incision lenticule extraction with and without prophylactic corneal crosslinking: 1-year outcomes

PURPOSE

To compare myopia and astigmatic correction after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with or without prophylactic crosslinking (SMILE Xtra).

SETTING

Shenyang Aier Eye Hospital, Central South University, China.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

METHODS

Patients with comparable manifest sphere and cylinder undergoing SMILE Xtra or SMILE were enrolled. The crosslinking (CXL) energy was 2.7 J/cm2. Only right eyes were selected. Visual and refractive changes were evaluated for 1 year. Astigmatic correction was analyzed using Alpins method.

RESULTS

Thirty-six eyes undergoing SMILE Xtra and 40 eyes undergoing SMILE were enrolled. The uncorrected distance visual acuity at 1-day visit was lower after SMILE Xtra than that after SMILE (P = .01). At 12 months, the mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) and manifest cylinder were 0.08 ± 0.32 diopters (D) and -0.29 ± 0.23 D in SMILE Xtra group, whereas -0.25 ± 0.29 D and -0.22 ± 0.19 D in SMILE group (P < .01 and P = .135), respectively. Thirty-four eyes (94%) and 32 eyes (89%) in SMILE Xtra group and 36 eyes (91%) and 39 eyes (98%) in SMILE group exhibited target MRSE and manifest cylinder within ±0.50 D (P = .771 and P = .294), respectively. Compared with SMILE group, spherical correction index (SCI), correction index (CI), and difference vector were higher in SMILE Xtra group since 1-week follow-up (all P < .05). SCI and CI were slightly more than 1.0 after SMILE Xtra even at postoperative 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

With CXL protocol of 30 mW/cm2 for 90 seconds, SMILE Xtra exhibited comparable astigmatic correction with SMILE up to 1-year follow-up, although slight spherical equivalent and astigmatic overcorrection were evident after SMILE Xtra.

Comparison of changes in corneal volume and corneal thickness after myopia correction between LASIK and SMILE

Myopia is the most common refractive error. Surgical correction with laser is possible. LASIK and SMILE are the techniques currently most used. Aim of the study was to compare changes in corneal volume and thickness after the respective laser treatment. 104 eyes of 52 patients were matched based on refractive error into two equally sized groups, either treated with LASIK or SMILE. Measurements were obtained from the Scheimpflug camera (Pentacam) preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. 3 months postoperatively, the flapless SMILE procedure resulted in a significant overall greater loss of corneal volume (P < 0.01) and corneal thickness (P < 0.01) compared to LASIK. No significant difference was found when comparing the 3 to 12-months values in each group. Within the currently used ranges of refractive error correction, loss in central corneal thickness and corneal volume with SMILE is higher in comparison to LASIK. As greater loss in corneal volume and thickness might contribute to higher level of corneal instability maximum ranges of refractive error correction with SMILE should not supersede those set currently for LASIK until more long-term results on corneal ectasia are available for SMILE.

Comparison of corneal aberrations and refractive outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond-assisted laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis

PURPOSES

To retrospectively compare the short-term refractive outcomes and corneal aberrations after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond-assisted laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) combined with smart pulse technology (SPT) in patients with compound myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

A total of 91 eyes (91 patients) were included, 43eyes in FS-LASIK group and 48 eyes in the SMILE group. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), refractive results and corneal topography were evaluated 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Corneal aberrations of anterior corneal surface were calculated from the topography data over 6 mm-diameter.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in UCVA, BCVA, and refractive results between the two groups. There were no statistical difference in TIA (target induced astigmatism), SIA (surgery induced astigmatism), DV (difference vector), ME (magnitude of error), AE (angle of error), AE (absolute value) and CI (correction index) between both groups at 1 and 3 months. Coma and spherical aberration improved in all the patients in both groups at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The amount of induced spherical aberrations was higher in FS-LASIK group compared to SMILE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both FS-LASIK and SMILE achieved similar refractive outcomes in patients with myopia and compound myopic astigmatism. FS-LASIK combined with SPT resulted in higher spherical aberration than SMILE in early postoperative period.

Comparison of Wavefront-Guided Femtosecond LASIK and Optimized SMILE for Correction of Moderate-to-High Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To compare refractive outcomes, higher order aberrations (HOAs), and the changes in contrast sensitivity after wavefront-guided femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (WFG LASIK) and optimized small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for moderate-to-high astigmatism correction.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized study included 87 eyes: 40 eyes in the WFG LASIK group and 47 eyes in the SMILE group. Manual cyclotorsion compensation by marking the horizontal axis before SMILE surgery was used for optimized SMILE. Refractive diopter, aberrations, and contrast sensitivity were assessed 3 months postoperatively. The Alpins vector analysis method was used to analyze the astigmatic changes after surgery.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the corrected distance visual acuity and refraction between the two groups after surgery. The fitted curve of surgically induced astigmatism versus target induced astigmatism was described as y = 0.9905 x + 0.0009 in the WFG LASIK group and y = 0.9672 x + 0.0026 in the SMILE group. The percentage of corneal astigmatism axis change within 5 degrees was statistically significant (chi-square test: 10.632, P = .001). HOAs increased in both the WFG LASIK and SMILE groups after surgery (t = -3.655, P = .001, t = -3.784, P = .001, respectively). However, comparison of the changes of HOAs between both groups was not significant (t = -0.565, P = .575). The improvement in contrast sensitivity in the WFG LASIK group was significantly higher than that in the SMILE group.

CONCLUSIONS

WFG LASIK and optimized SMILE can achieve similar outcomes for astigmatism correction. Optimized SMILE with marking could achieve good astigmatism correction, even without an eye tracking system. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(3):166-173.].

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.

Early visual quality outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction surgery for correcting high myopic astigmatism

Background

To evaluate early optical quality outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery for correcting high myopic astigmatism.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled 55 eyes from 37 patients who had preoperative myopic astigmatism of ≥2.00 diopters (D) who had been treated with SMILE surgery. Preoperatively, the mean cylinder was − 2.41 ± 0.54 D (range, − 2.00 D to − 4.50 D). The preoperative and postoperative visual outcomes, refraction, and higher-order aberration (HOA) at 1 and 3 months were compared. Refractive astigmatism changes were analyzed by the Alpins vector method.

Results

Three months after SMILE surgery, the average cylinder was − 0.14 ± 0.31 D, and the average astigmatism vector was − 0.09 D × 6.34°. The angle of error (AofE) was limited to within ±10°, and the magnitude of error was limited to within ±1.0 D in all patients. The correction index (CI) was 0.98 ± 0.07, the index of success (IOS) was 0.08 ± 0.13, and the flattening index (FI) was 0.97 ± 0.07. Significant positive correlations were found between IOS and |AofE| (P = 0.000); negative correlations were found between FI and |AofE| (P = 0.000). The postoperative total HOA, spherical aberration, vertical coma aberration, and trefoil 30° were increased significantly compared with preoperative measurements, and the increase in HOA was closely related to preoperative astigmatism (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

SMILE has preferable outcomes for correcting high myopic astigmatism. Axis rotation during the surgery might influence the undercorrection of astigmatism. The increase of HOA after surgery is related to preoperative astigmatism.

Two-year outcomes after full-thickness astigmatic keratotomy combined with small-incision lenticule extraction for high astigmatism

Background

To evaluate clinical outcomes after full-thickness astigmatic keratotomy (FTAK) combined with small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in eyes with high astigmatism.

Methods

This study comprised 75 eyes of 43 patients with over 4.0 diopters (D) of astigmatism who were treated with SMILE after FTAK. Visual acuities and refractive measurements were evaluated at 1 month after FTAK, and 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after SMILE. Vector analysis of the astigmatic changes was performed using the Alpins method.

Results

Twenty-four months after the combined procedure, the average spherical equivalent was reduced from − 6.56 ± 2.38 D to − 0.36 ± 0.42 D (p < 0.001). The uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities improved from 1.54 ± 5.53 to − 0.02 ± 0.09 and from − 0.03 ± 0.07 D to − 0.07 ± 0.08 D (both p < 0.001), respectively. The preoperative mean astigmatism was − 5.48 ± 1.17 D, which was reduced to − 2.27 ± 0.97 D and − 0.34 ± 0.26 D at 1 month after FTAK and 24 months after SMILE, respectively (p < 0.001). The surgically-induced astigmatism after FTAK, SMILE, and FTAK and SMILE combined was 3.38 ± 1.18 D, 2.22 ± 0.84 D, and 5.39 ± 1.20 D, respectively. Furthermore, the correction index of FTAK, SMILE, and FTAK and SMILE combined was 0.63 ± 0.17, 0.90 ± 0.40, and 0.98 ± 0.06, respectively. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications.

Conclusion

Our surgical procedure combining FTAK and SMILE showed good and stable clinical outcomes during two-year follow-up for the treatment of high astigmatism.

Vector analysis of small incision lenticule extraction and toric implantable collamer lens implantation for astigmatism correction

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and toric implantable collamer lens (TICL) implantation for myopic astigmatism correction using vector analysis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 171 eyes of 171 patients with cylinder ⩾1.0 diopters (D) were recruited, with 97 eyes underwent SMILE and 74 eyes underwent TICL implantation. Preoperative and 3-months postoperative visual and refractive results were examined. The astigmatism correction, graded by the degree of preoperative cylinder was compared between two groups using vector analysis.

RESULTS

At 3-months postoperatively, the residual cylinder was -0.10 ± 0.21 D in the SMILE group and -0.30 ± 0.32 D in the TCL group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, 98% and 85% of eyes had the cylinder within ±0.5 D in the SMILE and TICL group, respectively. The vector analysis revealed similar target induced astigmatism vector in two groups. However, the difference vector, magnitude of error, angle of error, and index of success were significantly higher (0.30 ± 0.32 D, -0.19 ± 0.25, -2° ± 4.35°, and 0.16 ± 0.17 D, respectively) in the TICL group than the values in the SMILE group (0.10 ± 0.21 D, -0.05 ± 0.20, -0.03° ± 2.13°, and 0.05 ± 0.12, respectively), regardless of the degree of preoperative cylinder (all p < 0.05). For preoperative cylinder < 2.0 D, surgically induced astigmatism vector and correction index in the SMILE group were higher than those in the TICL group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both SMILE and TICL implantation are effective techniques for myopic astigmatism correction. However, the accuracy of correction in the magnitude and axis of astigmatism with SMILE was better than that achieved with TICL implantation.

Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) for the Correction of Myopia with Astigmatism: Outcomes of the United States Food and Drug Administration Premarket Approval Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To present outcomes of the United States Food and Drug Administration premarket approval clinical trial of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for the correction of myopia and astigmatism.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter clinical trial.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 357 eyes of 357 patients treated with SMILE (50 for myopia and 307 for myopia with astigmatism). Preoperative sphere ranged between -1.00 and -10.00 diopters (D), with manifest spherical equivalent (MSE) of up to -11.50 D and refractive cylinder of up to -3.00 D.

METHODS

-Participants were followed up for 12 months. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), stability of the manifest refraction, and vector analysis of refractive cylinder are presented for the 307 eyes treated for myopia with astigmatism. Adverse events (AEs) are presented for all 357 eyes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Corrected distance visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, manifest refraction, astigmatic outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 307 astigmatic eyes enrolled in the study, 304 were treated successfully. In 3 eyes, the procedure was aborted because of intraoperative suction loss. The mean MSE reduced from -5.39±2.30 D at baseline to -0.01±0.24 D at 12 months. Of all eyes, 95.3% were within 0.50 D of emmetropia at 12 months. The percentage of eyes with UDVA of 20/20 or better was 89.0%. No loss of 2 or more lines of CDVA was observed at the 12-month visit. The refractive cylinder reduced from -1.53±0.70 D at baseline to -0.18±0.31 D at 12 months. The mean correction ratio of refractive cylinder was 0.96±0.16 and a slight undercorrection was apparent for higher attempted corrections of astigmatism. Three intraoperative AEs associated with difficult lenticule removal and resultant cap tear occurred, and all resolved without sequelae at postoperative day 1. During the postoperative period, 8 AEs were recorded, but none of them had significant consequences.

CONCLUSIONS

Small-incision lenticule extraction for the treatment of myopia and astigmatism was safe and effective, and the reported AEs had no significant impact on visual acuity. Slight undercorrection of refractive cylinder requires further attention.

Outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for Myopic Astigmatic Treatment

BACKGROUND:

Some studies have shown that there is a certain rotation of the eye in the sitting and lying position of the patient. The Visumax system used for the Refractive Lenticule Extraction-Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (ReLEx SMILE) surgery lacks the rotation of eye control function. So, is the ReLEx SMILE surgery for patients with astigmatism safe and effective?

AIM:

To evaluate the outcomes of the ReLEx SMILE surgery in cases with myopic astigmatism.

METHODS:

The case series included 120 eyes with myopic astigmatism undergoing ReLEx SMILE surgery from January 2018 to November 2018. The distribution of patients for two subgroups based on the power of astigmatism, low astigmatic group (≤ 1.50D) and high astigmatic group (> 1.50D). All patients were measured UDVA, CDVA, refractive sphere, astigmatism and sphere equivalent before and after surgery one week, one month and three months carefully. The astigmatic correction was evaluated by the vectorial analysis Alpins.

RESULTS:

The mean efficacy index of the low and high astigmatic group was 1.035 and 1.082 (respectively); the mean safety index was 1.113 and 1.215 (respectively). 93% of eyes in the low astigmatic group had an angle of error (AE) within ± 15 degrees and 100% in high astigmatic group. There was an undercorrection in astigmatic treatment. No complications during and after surgery were recorded.

CONCLUSION:

ReLEx SMILE surgery for the myopic astigmatic treatment was safe and effective.

[SMILE keratorefractive surgery technique]

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) keratorefractive surgery technique is a laser surgery alternative to common methods that doesn't require laser ablation of the cornea. Despite its novelty, SMILE technique has already demonstrated positive clinical results comparable to Photorefractive Keratectomy (PRK) and Laser-Assisted in Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK), which led to its widespread application in clinical practice. Compared with other keratorefractive techniques, SMILE has a number of distinct advantage including high biomechanical stability of the cornea, low risk of dry eye syndrome, absence of a corneal flap and associated complications, preservation of corneal epithelium. The article describes the most common SMILE modifications, its weak points and possible complications, as well as methods of additional correction of remaining ametropy.

Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Wavefront-Guided and Wavefront-Optimized Laser in Situ Keratomileusis

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes in wavefront-optimized (WFO) laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) to high-resolution wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK.

DESIGN

Randomized, fellow eye controlled, clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 200 eyes of 100 patients with myopia or compound myopic astigmatism undergoing bilateral LASIK between October 2015 and February 2017 underwent wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK in 1 eye and wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK in the fellow eye. Each eye was evaluated for uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), contrast sensitivity, refractive error, and wavefront aberrometry. Outcome measurement primarily UDVA at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were safety, predictability, stability, refractive error, CDVA, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations at 12 months.

RESULTS

WFG LASIK had higher levels of supervision and better contrast sensitivity compared to WFO. Both types had excellent postoperative UDVA results, without a significant difference in either mean UDVA or frequency of achieving a specified UDVA, for example, 20/16 or better (all P > 0.05). The mean gain in lines of CDVA was significantly higher in the WFG than in the WFO group (0.80 ± 0.75 vs 0.62 ± 0.72, respectively; P = 0.04). The WFG cohort had significantly better contrast sensitivity for mean and frequency of achieving >20/40 for <5% low-contrast sensitivity (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.5-46.7 vs 24.7%; 95% CI, 16.2-33.3, respectively; P = 0.01) and >20/32 for <25% low-contrast sensitivity (10.3%; 95% CI, 4.3-16.4 vs 4%, respectively; 95% CI, 0.0-8.1, respectively; P = 0.04). The WFO group had a significantly higher frequency of <0.25 diopters (D) of refractive astigmatism at 12 months (82.5%; 95% CI, 75.0-90.0; vs 72.1%, respectively; 95% CI, 63.2-81.2; P = 0.02) but not <0.50 D (95.6%; 95% CI, 91.9-99.8; vs 96.9, respectively; 95% CI, 93.5-100; P = 0.61). The WFG group was significantly closer to emmetropia for both sphere and spherical equivalents at all time points. Trefoil was significantly lower in the WFG group and was also significantly lower than preoperative measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

Wavefront-optimized and high-resolution wavefront-guided LASIK achieve excellent visual outcomes. Nonetheless, treatments based on a high-resolution aberrometer appear to offer superior results in some regards.

Status of Residual Refractive Error, Ocular Aberrations, and Accommodation After Myopic LASIK, SMILE, and TransPRK

PURPOSE

To analyze residual refractive error, ocular aberrations, and visual acuity (VA) during accommodation simultaneously with ocular aberrometry in eyes after laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TransPRK).

METHODS

Ocular aberrometry (Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX) was performed 3 months after LASIK (n = 95), SMILE (n = 73), and TransPRK (n = 35). While measuring the aberrations, VA was measured at distance (20 ft), intermediate (60 cm), and near (40 cm) targets. The examinations were done monocularly. A parallel group of age-matched normal eyes (n = 50) with 20/20 Snellen distance VA also underwent aberrometry.

RESULTS

Distribution of residual spherical error of LASIK eyes matched the normal eyes the best, followed by SMILE and TransPRK. However, the distribution of cylindrical error of the SMILE eyes was distinctly different from the rest (P < .05). The SMILE eyes tended to be undercorrected by approximately 0.25 diopters (D) on average at all reading targets compared to LASIK eyes (P < .05). The undercorrection was greater when the magnitude of the preoperative cylinder exceeded 0.75 D (P < .05). The VA of LASIK and SMILE eyes was similar to normal eyes at all targets, but the TransPRK eyes were marginally inferior (P < .05). Only the ocular defocus changed differentially between the study groups during accommodation and the magnitude of change was least for TransPRK eyes (P < .05). However, postoperative near and intermediate accommodation of LASIK eyes were similar to normal eyes, followed by SMILE eyes and then TransPRK eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

The refractive and aberrometric status of the LASIK eyes was closest to the normal eyes. The SMILE procedure may benefit from slight overcorrection of the preoperative refractive cylinder. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(10):624-631.].

Future Developments in SMILE: Higher Degree of Myopia and Hyperopia

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is a novel 1-step refractive procedure with femtosecond laser for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Although it has shown good clinical results in efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability, there are still some concerns. In this study, we review the published clinical outcomes of high myopia correction and exploration in hyperopia correction. Results have suggested that SMILE has acceptable outcomes in correction for high myopia <10.0 diopters (D), and it is a feasible and effective procedure for the treatment of hyperopia. However, it is unsuitable for the treatment of extremely high myopia because there is undercorrection and regression as existed in laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and compound hyperopic astigmatism currently could not be corrected either. More technical and clinical improvements are required to make SMILE competitive.

Astigmatism Correction Using SMILE

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) was introduced in the recent decade for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. This flap-free technique has a high efficacy and safety profile and also carries potential advantages over laser in situ keratomileusis such as a better corneal biomechanical stability, reduction in dry eyes rate, and the avoidance of flap complications. However, there have been concerns regarding the precision of astigmatism correction that undercorrection has been reported to be apparent. Various factors that affect astigmatism correction have been identified in the literature. The purpose of this review is to discuss the factors that affect astigmatism correction in SMILE and several techniques to improve the refractive outcomes.

Comparison of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery With and Without Cyclotorsion Error Correction for Patients With Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To evaluate the add-on effect of manual cyclotorsion error correction by the cornea-marking method over standard small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery in astigmatic eyes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (84) who had preoperative myopic astigmatism of -0.75 diopters (D) or more and were seeking surgical refractive correction by SMILE surgery during July 2017 to August 2017 were included in this study and randomized to treatment with standard SMILE surgery (S group: 30 eyes) or cyclotorsion compensated SMILE surgery (CC group: 54 eyes). The visual acuity and refractive outcomes were analyzed preoperatively and postoperatively. Refractive astigmatic changes were analyzed by the Alpins method.

RESULTS

The S and CC groups were comparable preoperatively regarding age, manifest spherical equivalent, and manifest refractive cylinder. The mean position-related cyclotorsion degree in the enrolled astigmatic eyes for the S and CC groups was 1.7 ± 2.2 degrees (ranging from 0 to 10 degrees) and 2.19 ± 1.74 degrees (ranging from 0 to 10 degrees), respectively. The mean cylinder was -1.67 ± 0.54 D versus -1.72 ± 0.71 D preoperatively. Six months after treatment, the surgical outcomes in the CC group were significantly better than those of the S group, with a postoperative corrected distance visual acuity of -0.07 ± 0.07 versus 0.016 ± 0.13. A vector analysis of astigmatism also yielded better outcomes in the CC group. However, these 2 groups were statistically similar in spherical equivalent.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE surgery combined with cyclotorsion error compensation yielded a significant improvement in surgical outcomes regarding safety, efficiency, and predictability for patients with astigmatism.

Comparison Between Q-Adjusted LASIK and Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction for Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To compare Q-adjusted femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in terms of safety, efficacy, and predictability, as well as in terms of changes in dry eye parameters, corneal biomechanics, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), and corneal asphericity.

METHODS

A total of 60 eyes were enrolled in this prospective comparative study: 30 underwent SMILE and 30 underwent FS-LASIK. Changes in manifest refraction, uncorrected distance visual acuity and corrected distance visual acuity, corneal topography, corneal hysteresis (CH), and corneal resistance factor (CRF) (Ocular Response Analyzer, ORA), and dry eye parameters were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was -4.17 (±1.86) preoperatively in FS-SMILE group and -3.97 (±2.02) in FS-LASIK group (P=0.69). Mean postoperative MRSE in FS-SMILE group was -0.25±0.38 diopter (D) and -0.183±0.33 D in FS-SMILE group (P=0.50). A total of 93% of treated eyes in both groups had a MRSE within ±0.5 D. The mean percentage change of CH was 14.23±17.59 and 18.89±7.2 mm Hg (P=0.1871) in FS-SMILE and FS-LASIK groups, respectively. The mean percentage change of CRF was 27.43±16.8 and 21.32±17.1 mm Hg (P=0.1682) in FS-SMILE and FS-LASIK groups, respectively. A statistically significant difference between techniques were found in the values of Schirmer test (P=0.0002) and tear breakup time (P=0.0035). Regarding corneal HOAs, no statistically significant differences between groups were found in the change in the root mean square of HOAs (P=0.2), coma aberration (P=0.0589), and spherical aberration (P=0.0543).

CONCLUSION

SMILE is as safe and predictable as FS-LASIK. According to the ORA system, SMILE is not better than FS-LASIK in terms of biomechanical changes. However, SMILE causes less effect on dry eye parameters during the first 3 postoperative months.

Wavefront-Guided LASIK Has Comparable Ocular and Corneal Aberrometric Outcomes but Better Visual Acuity Outcomes Than SMILE in Myopic Eyes

PURPOSE

To compare ocular and corneal aberrometric outcomes of wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

METHODS

This was a prospective, interventional study where 48 eyes (24 patients) underwent SMILE (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and 58 eyes (29 patients) underwent WFG LASIK (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL). Visual acuity and ocular surface disease index were assessed preoperatively and 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Corneal topography and anterior aberrations were assessed with the Pentacam (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany) and iTrace (Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX), respectively. Ocular aberrations were also assessed with the iTrace.

RESULTS

Safety and efficacy indexes of WFG LASIK (0.99 and 1.01, respectively) and SMILE (1.01 and 1.13, respectively) were comparable, although WFG LASIK was better (P < .0001). At 3 months postoperatively, all eyes in both groups achieved an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better. Further, 74.14% and 45.83% of the eyes in the WFG LASIK and SMILE groups, respectively, achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/16 (P = .003). The Pentacam reported an increase in root mean square of higher order aberrations (diameter of 4 mm and 6th order Zernike) and coma with a decrease in spherical aberration in both groups (P < .001). Corneal aberrations from the iTrace also did not yield any definitive differences between the treatments. However, changes in ocular aberrations were clinically insignificant at 3 months after both treatments. The ocular surface disease index increased mildly after WFG LASIK (P > .05) but was unchanged after SMILE.

CONCLUSIONS

WFG LASIK and SMILE had similar aberrometric outcomes but WFG LASIK had better postoperative visual acuity. Surgeon experience, internal aberrations, small pupil size, and wound healing can enable similar outcomes in both procedures. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(8):527-532.].

An Experimental Study of Femto-Laser in Assisting Xenograft Acellular Cornea Matrix Lens Transplantation

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using a femto-laser in assisting xenograft cornea matrix lens transplantation in correcting ametropia, along with evaluating the effectiveness and predictability of this procedure.

Material/Methods

A corneal matrix pouch was prepared on the right eyes on 8 healthy New Zealand rabbits by a femto-laser that was also employed to perform small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) on 8 bovine cornea matrix lenses (+6D). A lens was treated acellular and implanted into a right rabbit cornea matrix pouch. Surface inflammation was observed at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks after surgery. Anterior ocular segment optical coherence tomography (OCT), corneal topography, retinoscopy, and cornea endothelial cell enumeration were performed.

Results

All the surgeries were successfully performed without any complications. The hyperopia condition of the rabbit eyes transformed into myopia status at an early stage and gradually developed hyperopia. Diopter at 24 weeks after surgery was 1/3 of that before surgery. Central corneal thickness stabilized at 4 weeks after surgery. Anterior segment OCT showed a clear lens edge at early post-operative stage, and blurred edge at 24 weeks later, indicating gradual fusion with the rabbit corneal matrix.

Conclusions

Femto-laser assisted xenograft corneal matrix lens transplantation is safe and effective in correcting ametropia, with satisfactory predictability, thus providing novel choice for correcting ametropia.

Recent advances in wavefront-guided LASIK

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Laser vision correction remains an active area of research, and there have been many recent advances in the field. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the recent advances for one of the most common methods of laser vision correction, wavefront-guided laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent technological advancements in wavefront aberrometry are largely responsible for the improved visual outcomes that have been recently reported. In addition, improvements in femtosecond and excimer laser technology, used in flap creation and corneal ablation, have been shown to provide superior results when compared to microkeratomes and earlier lasers. Wavefront-guided LASIK appears to have advantages over some other keratorefractive modalities in terms of visual acuity, predictability, astigmatism correction, and subjective visual symptoms. Nonetheless, there may be some limitations in highly aberrated corneas, and also in biomechanical stability relative to other available platforms.

SUMMARY

Improvements in wavefront aberrometry, and also femtosecond and excimer lasers, have continued to improve our ability to correct refractive errors. Wavefront-guided LASIK remains a well tolerated and effective keratorefractive procedure, with a trend toward superiority. Nonetheless, further studies comparing this modality to others are needed to define the role each can serve.

Refractive lenticule extraction small incision lenticule extraction: A new refractive surgery paradigm

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), a variant of refractive lenticule extraction technology is becoming increasingly popular, as a flapless and minimally invasive form of laser vision correction (LVC) for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. This review aims at summarizing the principles, surgical technique, and clinical outcomes in terms of visual and refractive results, safety, efficacy, postoperative dry eye, aberrations, and biomechanics of SMILE and its comparison with other conventional techniques of LVC, such as laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). Recent advancements in the laser frequency and energy delivery patterns, instrumentation, and surgical techniques have shown significant improvement in the visual recovery and outcomes after SMILE, compared to the initial results published by Sekundo and Shah et al. Most of the recently published literature on long-term outcomes of SMILE shows excellent stability of the procedure, especially for higher myopia. In terms of the postoperative dry eye, SMILE shows a clear advantage over LASIK as numerous studies have shown significant differences about the Schirmer's, Tear film break up time, corneal sensitivity, and corneal nerve regeneration to be better following SMILE compared to LASIK. There is some evidence that since the Bowman's membrane (BM) and the anterior lamellae remain intact after SMILE, this may be a potential advantage for corneal biomechanics over LASIK and PRK where the BM is either severed or ablated, respectively, however, the data on biomechanics are inconclusive at present. Overall, this procedure has proved to be promising, delivering equivalent, or better visual and refractive results to LASIK and providing clear advantage in terms of being a flapless, minimally invasive procedure with minimal pain and postoperative discomfort thus offering high patient satisfaction.

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in the correction of myopic astigmatism: outcomes and limitations - an update

Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) is a flap-free intrastromal technique for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. To date, this technique lacks automated centration and cyclotorsion control, so several concerns have been raised regarding its capability to correct moderate or high levels of astigmatism. The objective of this paper is to review the reported SMILE outcomes for the correction of myopic astigmatism associated with a cylinder over 0.75 D, and its comparison with the outcomes reported with the excimer laser-based corneal refractive surgery techniques. A total of five studies clearly reporting SMILE astigmatic outcomes were identified. SMILE shows acceptable outcomes for the correction of myopic astigmatism, although a general agreement exists about the superiority of the excimer laser-based techniques for low to moderate levels of astigmatism. Manual correction of the static cyclotorsion should be adopted for any SMILE astigmatic correction over 0.75 D.