Refractive and visual outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in eyes with thin corneas

Comparative Analysis of Visual Outcomes and Complications in Intraocular Collamer Lens, Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction, and Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis Surgeries: A Comprehensive Review

This review provides a comparative analysis of visual outcomes and complications associated with three prominent refractive surgical techniques: intraocular collamer lens (ICL) implantation, small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Refractive surgeries aim to correct myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism, offering patients an alternative to corrective lenses. The review highlights the importance of comparing these procedures to guide clinical decision-making effectively. Each technique is described, emphasizing its unique advantages and considerations. While LASIK remains widely favored for its rapid visual recovery and high patient satisfaction, ICL is suitable for patients with higher refractive errors or corneal irregularities. Although relatively newer, SMILE shows promise with potential benefits such as corneal biomechanical stability and a reduced risk of dry eye syndrome. However, each procedure carries its distinct complications, reinforcing the need for personalized patient care and informed decision-making. Understanding these techniques' relative efficacy and safety profiles is essential for optimizing outcomes and enhancing patient satisfaction. Continued advancements in technology and surgical techniques promise further improvements in refractive surgery outcomes, underscoring the importance of ongoing research and innovation.

Prediction of SMILE surgical cutting formula based on back propagation neural network

AIM

To predict cutting formula of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery and assist clinicians in identifying candidates by deep learning of back propagation (BP) neural network.

METHODS

A prediction program was developed by a BP neural network. There were 13 188 pieces of data selected as training validation. Another 840 eye samples from 425 patients were recruited for reverse verification of training results. Precision of prediction by BP neural network and lenticule thickness error between machine learning and the actual lenticule thickness in the patient data were measured.

RESULTS

After training 2313 epochs, the predictive SMILE cutting formula BP neural network models performed best. The values of mean squared error and gradient are 0.248 and 4.23, respectively. The scatterplot with linear regression analysis showed that the regression coefficient in all samples is 0.99994. The final error accuracy of the BP neural network is -0.003791±0.4221102 µm.

CONCLUSION

With the help of the BP neural network, the program can calculate the lenticule thickness and residual stromal thickness of SMILE surgery accurately. Combined with corneal parameters and refraction of patients, the program can intelligently and conveniently integrate medical information to identify candidates for SMILE surgery.

Small incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis in patients with deep corneal opacity: case series

AIM

To report the safety, efficacy, and accuracy of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) or femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for the correction of myopia or myopic astigmatism in patients with deep corneal opacity denoted by anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT).

METHODS

Four patients with monocular corneal opacity (3 due to mechanical injury, 1 due to a firecracker wound) were recruited and treated with refractive surgery (3 for SMILE, 1 for FS-LASIK combined with limbal relaxing incision (LRI). Preoperative ocular manifestations, surgical details, postoperative visual outcomes, corneal opacity parameters, and corneal topography were analyzed.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, spherical diopter ranged from -3.0 D to -4.75 D with cylinder ranging from -0.75 to -5.0 D, and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) ranging from 20/25 to 20/20. One eye's corneal opacity was located in the central zone and three were in the mid-peripheral optical zone. Three patients underwent uneventful SMILE in both eyes, whilst one patient underwent FS-LASIK for high astigmatism in both eyes and LRI in the right eye. CDVA of the eye with corneal opacity ranged from 20/22 to 20/20 one to six weeks postoperatively. Two patients achieved better CDVA and no patients lost Snellen lines. The postoperative diopter was within ±0.75 D for all eyes. Significant edema existed above the corneal opacity in one eye and dissipated soon. No eccentric corneal topography or morphological anomaly of the corneal cap or flap was observed.

CONCLUSION

The cases demonstrate that SMILE or FS-LASIK is safe and effective to treat myopic astigmatism combined with deep corneal opacity lesions after comprehensive preoperative evaluation and appropriate candidate selection. FS-LASIK combined with LRI is also sufficient for correcting high astigmatism due to corneal scarring.

Simple method of measuring ocular rotation in supine position during small incision lenticule extraction

AIM

To introduce a novel measurement method of static cyclotorsion in small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and to investigate the effect of preoperative parameters on cyclotorsion and the effect of cyclotorsion on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

The medical records of 242 patients and 484 eyes who underwent SMILE surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative intraocular pressure, refractive error, and corneal thickness were investigated. Refractive values and visual acuity were measured at 1d, 1, 3, and 6mo. Ocular cyclotorsion in the supine position was measured by calculating the location and angle of the incision site of the cornea in the anterior slit photograph taken after surgery.

RESULTS

Of the total 484 eyes in 242 patients, preoperative mean spherical equivalent (SE) was -4.10±1.64 D, and the mean astigmatism was -0.82±0.74 D. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA) and SE improved significantly after the surgery. Moreover, 219 (45.2%) eyes had excyclotorsion, 235 (48.6%) eyes had incyclotorsion, and 30 (6.2%) eyes had no torsion. The right eyes tended to be excyclotorted, and the left eyes tended to be incyclotorted (P<0.01). The mean cyclotorsion was 1.18°±3.69°, and the mean absolute value of cyclotorsion was 3.14°±2.26°. The range of cyclotorsion was 0.5°-11.4°. It was found that the smaller the preoperative sphere, the higher the amount of cyclotorsion (r=0.11, P=0.016). There was no significant association between the amount of cyclotorsion and preoperative astigmatism. There was no correlation between sex, preoperative corneal thickness, preoperative intraocular pressure, amount of cyclotorsion, and direction of cyclotorsion. The ratio of right eye excyclotorsion and left eye incyclotorsion on 1d was higher than that at 1, 3, and 6mo (all P<0.01). There was no difference between the 1, 3, and 6mo results in the right and left eyes (P=0.15, P=0.16, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The newly devised ocular cyclotorsion measurement method can be used to evaluate ocular cyclotorsion after SMILE. Preoperative SE is associated with the amount of cyclotorsion, however, cyclotorsion doesn't have a significant effect on the results of SMILE surgery.

Visual Outcomes of Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) in Thin Corneas

We aimed to find out whether thin (≤500 μm) or normal (>500 μm, control) corneal thickness would impact efficacy and safety outcomes of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). We retrospectively analyzed medical records of adult patients who had undergone SMILE. A total of 57 eyes were included in the “thin corneas” group and 180 eyes in the “control” group. At one month after surgery, rates of patients with uncorrected distance visual activity (UDVA) ≥ 0.8 were significantly higher in patients from the control group compared to the “thin corneas” group (87 vs. 71%, respectively p < 0.01), though rates were comparable at 3 months (87 vs. 76%, respectively, p > 0.05). SMILE had comparable safety in patients with thin and normal corneas. Procedure result predictability was comparable between groups. Regression analysis demonstrated that cap thickness impacted posterior corneal biomechanics, and the volume of removed tissue had a higher influence in patients with thin corneas. Moreover, an increase in cap thickness was associated with better final BCVA. Further study is needed for the evaluation of the impact of thin corneas on SMILE outcomes and planning. Our study also indicates that patients with thin corneas might require a different approach to nomogram calculation.

Prophylactic corneal crosslinking in myopic small-incision lenticule extraction - Long-term visual and refractive outcomes

Purpose:

To analyze the efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability in myopic and astigmatic small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with simultaneous prophylactic corneal crosslinking (CXL) in thin corneas.

Methods:

A total of 48 eyes from 24 patients who underwent myopic and astigmatism SMILE with simultaneous prophylactic CXL were included in this retrospective study. All patients had a 24-month follow-up. A femtosecond laser was performed with VisuMax (Carl Zeiss Meditec). CXL treatment was applied when the predicted stromal thickness was less than 330 μm.

Results:

The patients’ mean age was 31.58 ± 6.23 years. The previous mean spherical equivalent was − 6.85 ± 1.80 (−9.75 to − 2.00) D. The postoperative mean spherical equivalent was − 0.50 ± 0.26 (−1.00 to + 0.25) D; 60% of the eyes had 20/20 or better; 19% lost one line; 58% were within ± 0.50 D; and 8.3% of the eyes changed 0.50 D or more between 3 and 24 months.

Conclusion:

Prophylactic CXL with simultaneous SMILE for myopia and astigmatism femtosecond laser surgery technique appears to be partially effective, safe, predictable, and stable after 24 months of follow-up.

Bilateral Lenticule Creation Followed by Bilateral Lenticule Separation Improves Visual Outcomes After SMILE

PURPOSE

To explore the impact of different surgical sequences on the visual and refractive outcomes of bilateral small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

METHODS

Participants who underwent uneventful SMILE between March 2018 and September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed and were divided into two groups: Sequence A (laser scanning [LS] of the right eye, manual separation lenticule [MSL] of the right eye, and LS and MSL of the left eye) and Sequence B (LS of the right eye, LS of the left eye, MSL of the left eye, and MSL of the right eye). PSM was conducted to minimize the effect of confounding factors on postoperative visual outcomes at days 1 and 7 and months 1, 3, and 6. Safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,854 eyes of 927 participants were included (Sequence A, n = 280; Sequence B, n = 647). After PSM, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, and 534 eyes (267 patients) in the Sequence A group were matched (1:1) to the Sequence B group. The postoperative corrected distance visual acuity significantly differed between groups at 3 months (adjusted P = .007). The uncorrected distance visual acuity significantly differed between groups at all follow-up visits (adjusted P < .01). The safety index (1.341 ± 0.265 and 1.413 ± 0.294) and efficacy index (1.173 ± 0.191 and 1.251 ± 0.269) were different in the Sequence A and Sequence B groups, respectively, at 3 months (adjusted P < .01). No difference in visual outcomes was found between right and left eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had bilateral lenticule creation followed by bilateral lenticule separation had better postoperative visual outcomes than those who underwent complete SMILE surgery in each eye separately. Regardless of the surgical sequence chosen for the SMILE procedure, there was no impact on outcomes between the right and left eyes. Adjusting the sequence of the surgical procedure may be a way to improve the visual results. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(11):726-733.].