Vector analysis of low to moderate astigmatism with small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE): results of a 1-year follow-up

Outcomes of Astigmatic Correction with and without Two Different Cyclotorsion Compensation Methods in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the astigmatic correction outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery with or without two different cyclotorsion compensation methods.

METHODS

This is a prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients with myopic astigmatism that underwent SMILE surgery were randomly divided into static cyclotorsion compensated group (SCC group), slit-lamp group and control group. In the SCC and slit-lamp groups, the intraoperative cyclotorsion was manually compensated with different limbal marking methods. In the control group, the cyclotorsion was not compensated. Visual acuity and manifest refraction were measured preoperatively and postoperatively. Astigmatic outcomes were estimated with vector analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 94 eyes from 94 patients were analyzed postoperatively at the 3-month follow-up. Their mean preoperative cylinder was -1.56±0.86 D (range: -4.25 to -0.25 D). The mean preoperative spherical equivalent was -5.95±1.72 D (range: -10.50 to -2.75 D). All groups showed favorable results in the correction of myopic astigmatism. No statistically differences were found among three groups in postoperative visual acuity, refractive outcomes or vector parameters.

CONCLUSION

Cyclotorsion compensation with two different manual limbal marking methods was helpful in aligning the surgical position in SMILE, but it was not as effective as expected for the correction of myopic astigmatism under well controlled surgical positioning.

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.

Safety and Effectiveness of Smooth Incision Lenticular Keratomileusis (SILKTM) Using the ELITA(TM) Femtosecond Laser System for Correction of Myopic and Astigmatic Refractive Errors

Purpose

To evaluate visual outcomes following the Smooth Incision Lenticular Keratomileusis (SILKTM) procedure for correction of myopic refractive errors with and without astigmatism, using the ELITATM Femtosecond Laser System.

Patients and Methods

A prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label clinical study was conducted. Eighty-five myopic subjects (n = 170 eyes), aged 18 years or older, with manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) up to -12.00 D and astigmatism up to -6.00 D, were treated binocularly using the ELITA femtosecond laser and followed up for 6 months. Intended correction was emmetropia for all eyes. The primary outcome measures included post-operative uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA). Secondary outcome measures included surgeon's rating for ease of lenticule extraction, predictability, safety, and stability.

Results

A total of 170 eyes of 85 patients underwent SILK. Preoperative mean MRSE was -4.14 D ± 1.32 D (range -1.38 D to -8.88 D) and the mean cylinder was -0.77 D ± 0.62 D. Intraoperative surgeon ease of lenticule dissection was rated as grade 0 or 1 in 85.3% of eyes (no/only mild dissection needed). UDVA at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months was 20/20 or better in 65.9%, 85.4%, 91.5%, and 96% of eyes, respectively. No eyes lost any lines of CDVA at 6 months compared to the preoperative. The postoperative MRSE was stable over time, ranging from -0.34 D ± 0.24 D at 1 month to -0.33 D ± 0.23 D at 6 months. MRSE predictability (± 0.50 D) was 93.5% (129/138) at 3 months and 91.1% (113/124) at 6 months. No serious adverse events were noted.

Conclusion

The SILK procedure with the ELITA Femtosecond Laser System is safe and effective for the treatment of myopic refractive errors with and without astigmatism. Fast visual recovery was demonstrated, with stability achieved by 3 months.

Comparison of the Clinical Effectiveness of Correcting Different Types of Astigmatism with Small Incision Lenticule Extraction

Few studies have reported the differential outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) on myopic astigmatism. Given this, we examined the effectiveness of SMILE for up to one year, comparing with-the-rule (WTR), against-the-rule (ATR), and oblique astigmatism, conducting a retrospective review of patients who underwent correction of myopic astigmatism using the 500-kHz VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec) at two refractive clinics in Poland between 2016-2017. Patients were aged ≥21 with stable refractive errors between -0.5 and -10.0 diopter (D) with astigmatism up to 5D. The mean age of the 209 patients (355 eyes) available was 32 years; 58.4% were female. Of these, 247 had WTR, 62 oblique, and 46 ATR astigmatism. The mean pre-operative spherical equivalent (SE) was -5.4 ± 2.57D and the cylinder -1.7 ± 1.0D. The mean SE for WTR reduced from -5.60 ± 2.37D to -0.31 ± 0.67D at 2 months and -0.38 ± 0.70D at 12 months; the mean cylinder improved from -1.90 ± 1.10D to -0.31 ± 0.39D and -0.36 ± 0.43D, respectively. Eyes with oblique astigmatism also improved from a mean SE of -5.8 ± 3.4 D to -0.82 ± 1.50D and -0.69 ± 1.15D and a cylinder of -1.4 ± 0.73D to -0.17 ± 0.33D at 2 months and -0.1 ± 0.32D at 12. For ATR, the mean SE improved from -4.0 ± 1.8D to -0.08 ± 0.22D and -0.04 ± 0.12D; and the mean cylinder from -1.25 ± 0.53 to -0.02 ± 0.09D -0.08 ± 0.21D at 2 and 12 months, respectively. There were statistically significant improvements in SE, manifest sphere and cylinder refraction, and UDVA and CDVA scores for each cylinder type at 2 months with ATR cylinders having better outcomes. Although missing data limited interpretation at one year, differences were maintained. The magnitude of error calculations suggests that WTR was more prone to under-correction, particularly for high astigmatism (>1.5D). SMILE for myopic astigmatism reliably corrects SE, irrespective of the subtype of astigmatism.

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.

Carbodiimide crosslinked decellularized lenticules as a drug carrier for sustained antibacterial eye treatments

In this study, the drug-loading and antibacterial activity of carbodiimide/N-hydroxysuccinimide (EDC/NHS) crosslinked decellularized lenticules (CDLs) were evaluated. Small incision lenticule extraction derived lenticules were decellularized and modified with crosslinking concentrations of 0.00 (E/L00, non-crosslinked), 0.01 (E/L01), 0.05 (E/L05) and 0.25 mmol (E/L25) EDC per mg lenticules at 5:1 EDC/NHS ratios with non-decellularized non-crosslinked lenticules (NDLs) as controls. NDLs and EDC/NHS CDLs had similar water contents. The light transmittance percentages (400-800 nm) were 91.55 ± 1.16%, 88.68 ± 1.19%, 80.86 ± 1.94%, 85.12 ± 2.42% and 85.62 ± 2.84% for NDLs, E/L00, E/L01, E/L05 and E/L25, respectively (P< 0.01). The EDC/NHS CDLs (diameter: 6.36 ± 0.18 mm; central thickness: 117.31 ± 3.46 μm) were soaked in 3% (wt./vol.) levofloxacin (LEV) solution for 3 h. The drug release concentrations of LEV-impregnated EDC/NHS CDLs were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Zone inhibition (ZOI) againstStaphylococcus aureusof E/L01, E/L05 and E/L25 were superior to E/L00 CDLs (P< 0.01) and among the different crosslinked groups, E/L05 lenticules produced the largest ZOIs and their drug concentration release over 21 d was the highest. EDC/NHS crosslinking can improve the drug-loading effect and antibacterial activity of decellularized lenticules. LEV-impregnated EDC/NHS CDLs are promising drug delivery carriers.

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 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.

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.

Effects of Laser In Situ Keratomileusis and Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction on Corneal Biomechanical Behavior: A Finite Element Analysis

Myopia, which is the result of the uncoordinated development of the eyeball, has become a major public health focus worldwide. Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) have been successfully used in modern corneal refractive surgery. However, there are still controversies about postoperative results of LASIK and SMILE. In this study, a three-dimensional finite element model of the cornea was constructed based on the elevation and pachymetry data of a female volunteer. Surgical parameters, magnitudes of myopic correction, and intraocular pressure (IOP) were varied. Furthermore, an iterative algorithm was applied to retrieve the free-stress state of the intact corneal model, LASIK model, and SMILE model. To better evaluate the differences between LASIK and SMILE procedures, the displacement and Von Mises stress on the anterior and posterior corneal surface along the x- and y-axes were analyzed. Results for the zero-pressure model showed larger displacement compared to the image-based corneal model, suggesting that the initial corneal pre-stress stiffens the response of the cornea, both in the intact cornea and under refractive surgery. In addition, the displacement on the corneal surface in LASIK (both zero-pressure and image-based model) was obviously higher than that of the SMILE model. In contrast, SMILE increased Von Mises stress in the corneal cap and reduced Von Mises stress in the residual stromal bed compared with the LASIK model. However, the maximum Von Mises stress in the SMILE model was still smaller than that of the LASIK model. Moreover, the displacement and Von Mises stress on the residual stromal bed increased linearly with IOP. Overall, LASIK and SMILE refractive surgery could change biomechanical behaviors of the cornea. Compared to LASIK refractive surgery, SMILE may present a lower risk of ectasia. Creating a corneal cap rather than a corneal flap may have an advantage in improving corneal biomechanical stability.

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 between vector planning and manifest refraction planning in SMILE for myopic astigmatism

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) between manifest refraction (MR) and vector planning for myopic astigmatism with high ocular residual astigmatism (ORA).

SETTING

Yonsei University College of Medicine and Eyereum Eye Clinic, Seoul, South Korea.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, comparative case series.

METHODS

Patients with myopic astigmatism and ORA of 0.75 diopters (D) or greater were randomized into the MR or vector planning group and underwent SMILE without applying any nomogram for cylinder correction. Visual acuity, MR, corneal topography, and corneal aberration were measured preoperatively and postoperatively. Outcomes at 6 months postoperatively were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The study comprised 114 patients (114 eyes): 58 eyes in MR planning and 56 eyes in vector planning. The mean uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, safety and efficacy indices were comparable between the 2 groups. Postoperative refractive cylinder reached statistically significant differences between the groups (-0.22 ± 0.18 D and -0.14 ± 0.16 D in the MR and vector planning groups, respectively, P = .02). Postoperative corneal toricity and ORA reached statistically significant lower in the vector planning group.

CONCLUSIONS

In myopic astigmatism with high ORA, MR and vector planning in SMILE were effective with comparable visual outcomes; vector planning showed statistically significant lower postoperative refractive and corneal astigmatism and ORA. Use of vector planning may improve refractive outcomes in SMILE cases with high ORA. However, the results may have been different had a nomogram adjustment been applied, as is often used for cylinder corrections with SMILE.

Artificial intelligence-based nomogram for small-incision lenticule extraction

BACKGROUND

Small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is a surgical procedure for the refractive correction of myopia and astigmatism, which has been reported as safe and effective. However, over- and under-correction still occur after SMILE. The necessity of nomograms is emphasized to achieve optimal refractive results. Ophthalmologists diagnose nomograms by analyzing the preoperative refractive data with their individual knowledge which they accumulate over years of experience. Our aim was to predict the nomograms of sphere, cylinder, and astigmatism axis for SMILE accurately by applying machine learning algorithm.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 3,034 eyes composed of four categorical features and 28 numerical features selected from 46 features. The multiple linear regression, decision tree, AdaBoost, XGBoost, and multi-layer perceptron were employed in developing the nomogram models for sphere, cylinder, and astigmatism axis. The scores of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and accuracy were evaluated and compared. Subsequently, the feature importance of the best models was calculated.

RESULTS

AdaBoost achieved the highest performance with RMSE of 0.1378, 0.1166, and 5.17 for the sphere, cylinder, and astigmatism axis, respectively. The accuracies of which error below 0.25 D for the sphere and cylinder nomograms and 25° for the astigmatism axis nomograms were 0.969, 0.976, and 0.994, respectively. The feature with the highest importance was preoperative manifest refraction for all the cases of nomograms. For the sphere and cylinder nomograms, the following highly important feature was the surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the diverse machine learning algorithms, AdaBoost exhibited the highest performance in the prediction of the sphere, cylinder, and astigmatism axis nomograms for SMILE. The study proved the feasibility of applying artificial intelligence (AI) to nomograms for SMILE. Also, it may enhance the quality of the surgical result of SMILE by providing assistance in nomograms and preventing the misdiagnosis in nomograms.

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.].

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.

Clinical Analysis of Central Islands after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE)

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence of central islands after 6-month follow-up of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) and to assess their role in safety and accuracy.

METHODS

Analysis of the preoperative and postoperative corneal tomography, best spectacle refraction and corrected distance visual acuity of 82 subjects that underwent SMILE. Incidence of central islands was assessed through total corneal spherical aberration (SA) over 4 mm of central diameter and the SA was compared between two groups with and without safety loss (CDVA difference ≥0.1 logMAR from preoperative). The cut-off value for detecting the risk of postoperative central island development was calculated. The influence in accuracy was calculated through magnitude of error of the spherical equivalent and astigmatism, both for spectacle refraction at corneal plane (SE-Rx and AST-Rx) and for total corneal refractive power at 3 mm (SE-TCRP3 and AST-TCRP3).

RESULTS

Five from 82 eyes resulted in a loss of safety, obtaining significant differences in SA, both preoperatively (p = .01) and postoperatively (p = .007) after stratification by safety loss. A preoperatively cut-off value ≤0.012 μm of SA predicted the appearance of central islands with sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 75%. Despite postoperative SA being related to the preoperative spherical equivalent, for both SE-Rx and SE-TCRP3, this tendency disappeared after readjusting results according to a nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

Central islands in SMILE, despite being a rare adverse event, can affect the safety of the procedure and are related to preoperative central steepness, not corrected by the spherical lenticule, which is clearly visible postoperatively.

Influence of age on small incision lenticule extraction outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the influence of patient's age at the time of surgery on small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) refractive outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, consecutive, comparative study. We compared the refractive outcomes after myopic SMILE from two groups of patients divided by age (patients ≤35 and ≥40 years old). All eyes were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 and 6 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures were differences on efficacy, safety, predictability and astigmatic changes by vector analysis with ASSORT software between both study groups.

RESULTS

102 matched eyes of 53 patients were included. Preoperatively, we evidenced no differences in the mean SE or astigmatism between groups. However, 6 months postoperatively we observed a significantly worse mean astigmatism (p=0.019), while not regarding SE, in the older population, with a trend towards undercorrection of the refractive cylinder in the ≥40 group. We also observed a statistically significant difference in the efficacy (0.86-1 month and 0.97-6 months in ≥40group vs 0.97-1 month and 1.07-6 months in the ≤35 group; p=0.003) and safety indexes (0.93-1 month and 1.04-6 months in ≥40 group vs 1.0-1 month and 1.11-6 months in the ≤35 group; p=0.008) at 6 months among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-SMILE refractive outcomes in those patients over 40 years of age, although acceptable, are not as good as those obtained in younger patients, showing a significantly lower efficacy and safety indexes, and poorer astigmatic outcomes, with a tendency towards undercorrection. We hypothetise that the increased corneal stroma stiffness in the aged group modifies the post-SMILE corneal stroma remodelling capacity, thus affecting the SMILE refractive and visual response.

Initial Single-Site Experience Using SMILE for the Treatment of Astigmatism in Myopic Eyes and Comparison of Astigmatic Outcomes with Existing Literature

Purpose

To assess a single site’s initial experience with SMILE for the treatment of myopic astigmatism and compare outcomes and vector analysis results with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) results and published literature.

Patients and Methods

Forty-eight eyes (29 patients) with mean preoperative sphere of −5.11 ± 1.31 diopters (D) and cylinder of −1.12 ± 0.60 D underwent SMILE. Visual acuity, refractive, and vector analysis outcomes as well as subjective measures were reported at three and twelve months postoperatively and compared with FDA results and the published literature between 2014 and 2020 involving treatment of patients with mean cylinders of >−0.50 to ≤−3.00 D.

Results

At three and twelve months, 43 and 32 eyes were evaluated, respectively. At twelve months, mean cylinder power was reduced to −0.38 ± 0.38 D with 78.1% achieving ≤±0.50 D. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) ≥20/20 was achieved in 77.4% of eyes by twelve months with 100% achieving ≥20/30 UDVA. No loss of corrected distance visual acuity was observed in eyes seen at twelve months. Correction index (CI) at twelve months was 0.90 indicating overall undercorrection of 10%. Twelve-month CI was 0.96, 0.90, and 0.83 in eyes with preoperative cylinders of <−1.00 D, ≥−1.00 to <−2.00 D, and ≥−2.00 D, respectively. Mean angle of error was −1.58 ± 11.61° ranging from −24.22° to 37.75°.

Conclusion

We found SMILE to be an effective and safe means of achieving spectacle independence and improving visual acuity in patients with myopic astigmatism. SMILE has the potential for improved clinical outcomes with better nomogram guidance and advancements in technique. However, surgeons must be aware of the potential for undercorrection in with-the-rule astigmatism and at higher preoperative cylinders and as well as the potential for overcorrection in against-the-rule and lower preoperative cylinder astigmatism.

Long-term Vector Outcomes of SMILE in Correcting Moderate to High With-the-Rule Astigmatism Under Astigmatism Axis Marked Condition

PURPOSE

To evaluate the vector outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in correcting moderate to high myopic astigmatism under astigmatic axis marked condition.

METHODS

In a prospective, longitudinal, interventional study, 71 eyes (71 patients) that had with-the-rule preoperative cylinder refraction exceeding 1.50 diopters (D) were corrected with the VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) at Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center. Refractive outcomes and astigmatic vector were evaluated preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 30 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

At 30 months postoperatively, the efficacy and safety indexes were 1.04 ± 0.18 and 1.15 ± 0.17, respectively. The magnitude of the surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) (2.13 ± 0.71 D at 1 month [P_1m-pre = .018], 2.12 ± 0.72 D at 3 months [P_3m-pre = .006], 2.13 ± 0.69 D at 6 months [P_6m-pre = .010], and 2.19 ± 0.72 D at 30 months [P_30m-pre < .001]) was slightly higher than that of the target induced astigmatism (TIA) (2.07 ± 0.69 D). Only the y-coordinate of the SIA vector had a significant overcorrection compared to that of the TIA vector (P_1m-pre = .033, P_3m-pre = .011, P_6m-pre = .012, P_30m-pre < .001). The corrected index (CI = |SIA|/|TIA|) varied from 1.03 ± 0.07 at 1 month to 1.06 ± 0.10 at 30 months, which was higher when correcting moderate astigmatism than when correcting high astigmatism (P = .041) at 30 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE had long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and stability when correcting moderate to high myopic astigmatism under astigmatism axis marked condition. Meanwhile, a cylinder overcorrection was observed due to the overcorrection of y-coordinate astigmatic power, which implied that the vector adjustment of the cylinder refraction nomogram should be considered. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(9):585-591.].

Visual outcomes after SMILE from the first-year experience at a U.S. military refractive surgery center and comparison with PRK and LASIK outcomes

PURPOSE

To assess the visual outcomes of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) after the first year of treatments at a military refractive surgery center and compare with photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) outcomes during the same period.

SETTING

Warfighter Refractive Eye Surgery Program and Research Center, Fort Belvoir, VA.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

METHODS

Records of service members who underwent SMILE, PRK, or LASIK for myopia from March 2017 to February 2018 were reviewed. Preoperative and up to 6-month postoperative data were collected. Visual outcomes were compared between treatments.

RESULTS

Of 563 treated eyes, 173 (30.7%) underwent SMILE, 304 (54.0%) PRK, and 86 (15.3%) LASIK. In comparing SMILE with PRK 1 month postoperatively, SMILE (145 eyes [87.9%]) attained uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) ≥20/20 more vs PRK (214 eyes [73.8%]; P < .01). Similarly, SMILE (152 eyes [94.4%]) achieved more eyes with manifest spherical equivalent (MSE) within ±0.50 diopters (D) from intended target vs PRK (250 eyes [85.9%]; P = .01). None lost ≥1 line of corrected distance visual acuity in SMILE vs PRK (16 eyes [5.5%]; P < .01). Thereafter, there were no other significant differences except SMILE had 117 eyes (95.1%) vs PRK with 224 eyes (99.6%) achieving UDVA ≥20/20 at 3 months postoperatively (P = .01). In assessing SMILE vs LASIK, all parameters were comparable; however, 77 SMILE eyes (96.3%) had MSE within ±0.50 D from target vs 31 LASIK eyes (83.8%) at 6 months postoperatively (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The first year after SMILE treatments in a U.S. military center demonstrated early postoperative outcomes superior to PRK. SMILE seemed more predictable compared with LASIK.

Four-year outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) to correct high myopic astigmatism

AIMS

To evaluate the long-term outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in subjects with myopic astigmatism of ≥2.00 dioptres (D).

METHODS

Patients who underwent SMILE 4 years prior with astigmatism ≥2.00 D and ≤1.00 D were assigned to the high astigmatic group (HA group) or the low astigmatic group (LA group), respectively. The visual and refractive results as well as corneal wavefront aberrations were measured.

RESULTS

The preoperative cylinder was -2.47±0.54 D in 43 eyes in the HA group and -0.55±0.28 D in 31 eyes in the LA group. At 4 years, the residual cylinder was -0.31±0.29 D in the HA group and -0.20±0.28 D in the LA group (p=0.088). An uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 was achieved in 88.4% of eyes in the HA group and 93.5% of eyes in the LA group. The efficacy index was 0.99±0.14 and 1.10±0.21 (p=0.025), and the safety index was 1.11±0.20 and 1.22±0.21 in the HA and LA groups, respectively (p=0.012). Eighty-six per cent and 90.3% of eyes were within ±0.50 D of the attempted cylindrical correction in the HA and LA groups, respectively. Vector analysis showed that the magnitude of error was -0.14±0.28 D and -0.05±0.16 D (p=0.085), the angle of error was -0.13±4.48 degrees and -2.57±29.42 degrees (p=0.592), the correction index was 0.94±0.13 and 0.94±0.35 (p=0.959), the index of success was 0.15±0.14 and 0.46±0.62 (p=0.517), and the flattening index was 0.93±0.13 and 0.71±0.59 (p=0.450) in the HA and LA groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that SMILE is effective and safe for correcting high astigmatism. Vector analysis shows a tendency for the undercorrection of astigmatism in subjects with high astigmatism.

Applying Machine Learning Techniques in Nomogram Prediction and Analysis for SMILE Treatment

PURPOSE

To analyze the outcome of machine learning technique for prediction of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) nomogram.

DESIGN

Prospective, comparative clinical study.

METHODS

A comparative study was conducted on the outcomes of SMILE surgery between surgeon group (nomogram set by surgeon) and machine learning group (nomogram predicted by machine learning model). The machine learning model was trained by 865 ideal cases (spherical equivalent [SE] within ±0.5 diopter [D] 3 months postoperatively) from an experienced surgeon. The visual outcomes of both groups were compared for safety, efficacy, predictability, and SE correction.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the baseline data in both groups. The efficacy index in the machine learning group (1.48 ± 1.08) was significantly higher than in the surgeon group (1.3 ± 0.27) (t = -2.17, P < .05). Eighty-three percent of eyes in the surgeon group and 93% of eyes in the machine learning group were within ±0.50 D, while 98% of eyes in the surgeon group and 96% of eyes in the machine learning group were within ±1.00 D. The error of SE correction was -0.09 ± 0.024 and -0.23 ± 0.021 for machine learning and surgeon groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The machine learning technique performed as well as surgeon in safety, but significantly better than surgeon in efficacy. As for predictability, the machine learning technique was comparable to surgeon, although less predictable for high myopia and astigmatism.

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.

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.

History and Results; Indications and Contraindications of SMILE Compared With LASIK

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is a new paradigm for refractive surgery, and was first performed by Sekundo and Blum in 2008. It uses only a femtosecond laser to carve out a lenticule within the corneal stroma, and then achieves refractive correction by extracting the lenticule through a small incision. A number of studies have shown that SMILE leads to stable and efficacious outcomes, combined with high safety. Long-term studies also indicate that SMILE has excellent outcomes combined with high safety. Although relatively safe, SMILE can have some intraoperative and postoperative complications, including suction loss during the procedure, lenticule tears, incision tears, epithelial ingrowth, diffuse lamellar keratitis, and residual refractive error. Studies indicate that SMILE leads to less postoperative dry eyes. It is thus preferred over laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in cases wherein there is mild dry eye preoperatively. It is also preferred over LASIK in cases wherein the patient is likely to engage in contact sports. LASIK may be preferred over SMILE for the treatment of hyperopia, and in cases of significant higher order wavefront aberrations or topographic irregularities.

Clinical outcomes of small-incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Small-incision lenticule extraction and wavefront-guided femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) provide good visual outcomes and an efficacious correction of myopia or myopic astigmatism with similar levels of safety. Some differences in predictability and the percentage of eyes gaining lines of corrected distance visual acuity are present. A higher level of coma is present after small-incision lenticule extraction, with no clear differences between techniques in spherical aberration. Better contrast sensitivity is achieved in the early postoperative period after wavefront-guided femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK, possibly because of less intrastromal light backscattering and Bowman layer microdistortions. Corneal sensitivity decreased less after small-incision lenticule extraction because of less severe decrease in subbasal nerve density, which has a significant effect on symptomatology and dry-eye tests (P < .05). Significant corneal biomechanical changes occurred after both techniques (P < .05), with no scientific evidence supporting the superiority of 1 technique over the other.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

Dr. Piñero received an unrestricted educational grant from Abbott Medical Optics, Inc. Neither author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Vector Analysis of the Effects of FS-LASIK and Toric ICL for Moderate to High Astigmatism Correction

Purpose

To estimate the treatment effectiveness of femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) and Toric implantable collamer lens (Toric ICL) for moderate and high astigmatism via vector analysis.

Materials and Methods

The study involved 44 eyes from 44 patients who had a preoperative refractive cylinder ≥1.0 diopters (D) and underwent bilateral FS-LASIK or Toric ICL surgery. The examinations included corrected distance visual acuity measurement and subjective refraction before and 3 months after surgery. The astigmatic changes were estimated using vector analysis.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found in cylindrical refraction and percentage of spherical equivalent within 0 D, ±0.50 D, ±1.00 D, and ±1.50 D between the FS-LASIK and Toric ICL groups at 3 months after surgery. The parameters of the vector analysis included intended refractive correction, surgically induced refractive correction, error vector, correction ratio, error ratio, error of magnitude, and error of angle, with no significant differences between the groups. However, error ratio the of the off-axis correction in the FS-LASIK and Toric ICL groups was 4.11 ± 3.02 and 8.11 ± 3.82, respectively, and the difference was significant (t = −2.46, p=0.02).

Conclusion

Both FS-LASIK and Toric ICL were effective for correcting moderate and high astigmatism, although Toric ICL might produce a larger error of angle than FS-LASIK when an off-axis correction occurs.

Comparison between Wavefront-optimized and corneal Wavefront-guided Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in moderate to high astigmatism

BACKGROUND

To compare the clinical outcomes of wavefront-optimized (WFO) transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (trans-PRK) and corneal wavefront-guided (CWFG) trans-PRK for myopic eyes with moderate to high astigmatism.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-six eyes (196 patients) with moderate to high astigmatism (≥ 1.75 D) treated with WFO or CWFG trans-PRK (101 and 95 eyes, respectively) were retrospectively registered. Safety, efficacy, predictability, vector analysis, and corneal aberrations were compared between groups preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

At postoperative 6 months, the mean logMAR uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar in the WFO (- 0.07 ± 0.08) and CWFG (- 0.07 ± 0.07) groups. Safety, efficacy, and predictability of refractive and visual outcomes were also similar. The correction indices were 1.02 ± 0.14 and 1.03 ± 0.13 in the WFO and CWFG groups, respectively, with no significant difference. The absolute values of the angle of error were significantly higher in the WFO group (2.28 ± 2.44 vs. 1.40 ± 1.40; P = 0.002). Corneal total root mean square higher-order aberrations and corneal spherical aberrations increased postoperatively in both groups; however, the change was smaller in the CWFG group. Corneal coma showed a significant increase postoperatively only in the WFO group.

CONCLUSIONS

WFO and CWFG trans-PRK are safe and effective for correcting moderate to high astigmatism. However, CWFG trans-PRK provides a more predictable astigmatism correction axis and fewer induced corneal aberrations.

Clinical Outcomes of SMILE With a Triple Centration Technique and Corneal Wavefront-Guided Transepithelial PRK in High Astigmatism

PURPOSE

To comparatively investigate the clinical outcomes, vector parameters, and corneal aberrations of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with a triple centration technique and corneal wavefront-guided transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for the correction of high astigmatism.

METHODS

This retrospective, comparative case series study included 89 eyes (89 patients) that received treatment for myopia with high astigmatism (≥ 2.50 diopters) using SMILE with a triple centration technique (SMILE group; 45 eyes) and corneal wavefront-guided transepithelial PRK (transepithelial PRK group; 44 eyes). Visual acuity measurement, manifest refraction, slit-lamp examination, autokeratometry, corneal topography, and evaluation of corneal wavefront aberration were performed preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. The safety, efficacy, vector parameters, and corneal aberrations at 6 months after surgery were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

At 6 months after surgery, the transepithelial PRK and SMILE groups exhibited comparable mean uncorrected distance visual acuities (-0.06 ± 0.07 and -0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR, respectively), safety, efficacy, and predictability of refractive and visual outcomes. There was a slight but statistically significant difference in the correction index between the transepithelial PRK and SMILE groups (0.96 ± 0.11 and 0.91 ± 0.10, respectively). Whereas the transepithelial PRK group exhibited increased corneal spherical aberration and significantly reduced corneal coma and trefoil, no changes in aberrometric values were noted in the SMILE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both SMILE with a triple centration technique and corneal wavefront-guided transepithelial PRK are effective and provide predictable outcomes for the correction of high myopic astigmatism, although slight undercorrection was observed in the SMILE group. The triple centration technique was helpful in astigmatism correction by SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(3):156-163.].

Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of SMILE and Wavefront-Guided LASIK in Low and Moderate Myopia

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia.

METHODS

This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean efficacy index was 0.92 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively (P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively (P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order (P < .001) and coma (P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree (P ≤ .001) were observed after SMILE.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298-304.].

Clinical outcomes of Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy to treat low to moderate myopic astigmatism

Background

To evaluate the refractive and visual outcomes of Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TransPRK) in the treatment of low to moderate myopic astigmatism.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled a total of 47 eyes that had undergone Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy. Preoperative cylinder diopters ranged from − 0.75D to − 2.25D (mean − 1.11 ± 0.40D), and the sphere was between − 1.50D to − 5.75D. Visual outcomes and vector analysis of astigmatism that included error ratio (ER), correction ratio (CR), error of magnitude (EM) and error of angle (EA) were evaluated.

Results

At 6 months after TransPRK, all eyes had an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, no eyes lost ≥2 lines of corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA), and 93.6% had residual refractive cylinder within ±0.50D of intended correction. On vector analysis, the mean correction ratio for refractive cylinder was 1.03 ± 0.30. The mean error magnitude was − 0.04 ± 0.36. The mean error of angle was 0.44° ± 7.42°and 80.9% of eyes had axis shift within ±10°. The absolute astigmatic error of magnitude was statistically significantly correlated with the intended cylinder correction (r = 0.48, P < 0.01).

Conclusions

TransPRK showed safe, effective and predictable results in the correction of low to moderate astigmatism and myopia.

Effect of the Learning Curve on Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of the learning curve for small-incision lenticule extraction during the first 2 years of experience.

METHODS

Small-incision lenticule extraction was performed using the 500-kHz VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec) by the same surgeon. The initial 100 patients since the surgeon started operating independently were considered as group 1; the recent 100 patients were considered as group 2. The same laser settings and technique were used. The visual and refractive outcomes were compared between groups at postoperative 1 week and 6 months. Vector analysis was performed for eyes with astigmatic correction.

RESULTS

Two hundred right eyes of 200 patients were included. Age, preoperative corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, and central corneal thickness were similar between groups (P ≤ 0.154). Postoperatively, the efficacy index at 1 week was better in group 2 (group 1: 0.85 ± 0.16 vs. group 2: 0.91 ± 0.10, P = 0.019) but was similar between groups at 6 months (group 1: 0.91 ± 0.14 vs. group 2: 0.94 ± 0.08, P = 0.181). The safety index was higher in group 2 at 1 week (group 1: 0.93 ± 0.10 vs. group 2: 0.95 ± 0.08, P = 0.045) and 6 months postoperatively (group 1: 0.97 ± 0.07 vs. group 2: 0.99 ± 0.03, P = 0.011). Vector analysis showed that postoperative residual astigmatism and misalignment of astigmatic correction were lower in group 2 than in group 1 (P ≤ 0.039) at 1 week and 6 months. The duration of docking and that of lenticule extraction was shorter in group 2 (P ≤ 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that faster visual recovery, better safety profile, and more accurate astigmatic correction could be attained with increasing surgical experience.

Results of Intraoperative Manual Cyclotorsion Compensation for Myopic Astigmatism in Patients Undergoing Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE)

PURPOSE

To study the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of manual cyclotorsion compensation in small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

Eligible patients with myopia from -1.00 to -10.00 diopters (D) spherical equivalent with a minimum astigmatism of 0.75 D undergoing SMILE were included. Intraoperative cyclotorsion compensation was performed by gently rotating the cone and aligning the 0° to 180° limbal marks with the horizontal axis of the reticule of the right eye piece of the microscope of the femtosecond laser after activating the suction.

RESULTS

In this study, 81 left eyes from 81 patients were analyzed for vector analysis of astigmatism. The mean cyclotorsion was 5.64° ± 2.55° (range: 2° to 12°). No significant differences were found for surgically induced astigmatism, difference vector, angle of error (AE), correction index, magnitude of error, index of success (IOS), and flattening index between 2 weeks and 3 months postoperatively (P > .05). The eyes were categorized into low (≤ 1.50 D, n = 37) and high (> 1.50 D, n = 44) cylinder groups. At 3 months, intergroup analysis showed a comparable correction index of 0.97 for the low and 0.93 for the high cylinder groups, suggesting a slight undercorrection of 3% and 7%, respectively (P = .14). However, the AE and IOS were significantly lower in the high compared to the low cylinder group (P = .032 and .024 for AE and IOS, respectively), suggesting better alignment of the treatment in the high cylinder group. However, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity of both groups was comparable (P = .21), suggesting good visual outcomes in the low cylinder group despite a less favorable IOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Manual compensation may be a safe, feasible, and effective approach to refine the results of astigmatism with SMILE, especially in higher degrees of cylinders. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(8):506-512.].

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.

Comparison of visual results and higher-order aberrations after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE): high myopia vs. mild to moderate myopia

Background

To compare the refractive results and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in high myopia and mild to moderate myopia patients.

Methods

This prospective study included 165 eyes (86 patients) undergoing SMILE. According to the preoperative spherical equivalent (SE), treated eyes were divided into two groups: the high myopia group (more than -6.0 D, group-H) and the mild to moderate group (less than -6.0 D, group-M). Follow-up intervals were at 1 day, 10 days, 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. We obtained the following parameters: uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), SE, efficacy and safety index, and HOAs.

Results

Preoperative SE was -7.16 ± 0.93 D in group-H and -4.34 ± 0.97 D in group-M. At 3 months postoperatively, the SE in group-H and group-M was -0.20 ± 0.37 D and 0.01 ± 0.19 D (t = - 4.11, P<0.05), respectively. It was found that 77% and 98% had an UDVA of 20/20, 98% and 99% had a CDVA of 20/20 in group-H and group-M, respectively, while 87% and 95% had a SE within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D in group-H, and 98% and 100% in group-M. The efficacy indexes were 0.98 ± 0.18 in group-H and 1.05 ± 0.10 in group-M (t = - 3.084, p < 0.05). The safety indexes were 1.06 ± 0.09 and 1.06 ± 0.09 (t = 0.153, p > 0.05), respectively. There were significant increases in total HOAs, 3^rd-order coma, and 4^th-order spherical aberrations.

Conclusions

SMILE is an effective and safe surgery for correcting myopia. But the target correction amount in high myopia patients should be adjusted to avoid undercorrection and acquired more satisfaction. SMILE induced increases of HOAs.

Trial registration

ChiTrial registration number: ChiCTR-OON-16009164. Retrospectively registered: 06.September.2016

Matched population comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction between 3 modalities for the correction of low to moderate myopic astigmatism

Purpose

To compare toric implantable collamer lens (T-ICL), femto-LASIK, and ReLEx SMILE for the treatment of low to moderate myopic astigmatism in terms of long-term visual and refractive outcomes and predictability of astigmatic correction.

Materials and methods

The study included 30 eyes from 30 patients between the age groups of 21 and 40 years, undergoing bilateral surgery with any of the three procedures – T-ICL, femto-LASIK, or ReLEx SMILE – for correction of myopic astigmatism within the range of −3 to −8 D spherical equivalent (SE), with a minimum astigmatism of −0.75 D. Patients were followed up at day 1, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year.

Results

At 1 year, the mean cylinder reduced to −0.21±0.28, −0.17±0.36, and −0.22±0.28 D in the T-ICL, femto-LASIK, and ReLEx SMILE group, respectively. The predictability of astigmatism correction was comparable, with no statistically significant difference between the 3 groups (P>0.05). A total of 97% of eyes in ReLEx SMILE achieved a uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, compared to T-ICL (93%) and FS-LASIK (90%). However, gain in lines of corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA) was maximum in T-ICL group (60%). Four eyes in the femto-LASIK group had loss of CDVA by one line. Three eyes required exchange due to high vault and rotation of the T-ICL, which did not affect the final outcome.

Conclusion

All 3 modalities were effective for myopic astigmatism at the end of 1 year. Quality of vision and patient satisfaction with T-ICL and ReLEx SMILE were similar and better than FS-LASIK. However, slight chances of postoperative rotation and exchange exist with T-ICL, which warrant thorough preoperative planning.

Corneal Higher-Order Aberrations of the Anterior Surface, Posterior Surface, and Total Cornea After SMILE, FS-LASIK, and FLEx Surgeries

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) of the anterior surface, posterior surface, and total cornea after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and compare the results using femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) and femtosecond laser lenticule extraction (FLEx).

METHODS

This study included 160 eyes in total; 73 eyes underwent SMILE, 52 eyes underwent FS-LASIK, and 35 eyes underwent FLEx surgery. Corneal HOAs of the anterior surface, posterior surface, and total cornea were evaluated using a Scheimpflug camera over 6-mm diameter preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The anterior and total corneal HOAs significantly increased after SMILE, FS-LASIK, and FLEx surgeries, especially the spherical aberration and coma, whereas most posterior corneal HOAs remained unchanged. The SMILE procedure induced significantly lower anterior corneal and total corneal spherical aberration and third to eighth HOAs compared with FLEx surgery (P<0.01). FLEx surgery induced higher posterior corneal coma than SMILE (P=0.013) and FS-LASIK (P<0.001) surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

SMILE, FS-LASIK, and FLEx surgeries mainly induced coma and spherical aberrations in the anterior surface and total cornea. The SMILE procedure induced less spherical aberration of the anterior cornea and total cornea than FLEx surgery. The posterior corneal spherical aberration significantly increased after FS-LASIK surgery. The SMILE procedure seems to have fewer effects on posterior corneal coma compared with the FLEx procedure.