Review of Corneal Biomechanical Properties Following LASIK and SMILE for Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism

Progressive Paracentral Visual Field Loss at Low Intraocular Pressures Following LASIK

Intraocular pressure is currently the only known reliable, modifiable risk factor for the development and progression of glaucoma. Other risk factors for glaucoma include increasing age, myopia, decreased central corneal thickness, and low corneal hysteresis (CH) measurements. Photoablative keratorefractive surgery including laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) has become a common way to treat refractive error, with over 25 million procedures performed in the United States alone. Though myopic LASIK has been associated with a decrease in CH measurements, relatively little is known about the risk of LASIK on glaucoma onset and progression. Here we present an observational study of 4 consecutive relatively young and otherwise healthy glaucoma patients with a history of myopic LASIK who showed progression of paracentral visual field deficits at intraocular pressures of 12 mm Hg or less while being carefully monitored. Therefore, these patients required lower targets of intraocular pressure, in the single-digit range, to slow or halt progression. In this cohort, the average corneal hysteresis was more than 2 standard deviations below normal values. This series suggests that additional study into the association of LASIK and glaucoma is warranted, including the potential risk contribution of diminished CH. These studies may be particularly relevant as patients who underwent LASIK procedures in the early 2000s may now be at increased risk of glaucoma due to the risk factor of age.

Early elastic and viscoelastic corneal biomechanical changes after photorefractive keratectomy and small incision lenticule extraction

PURPOSE

To compare early changes in the corneal biomechanical parameters after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and their correlations with corneal shape parameters.

METHODS

One hundred twenty four eyes received myopic PRK and SMILE for similar amounts of myopia. Corneal tomography with Pentacam HR, biomechanical parameters using Corvis ST, and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) were evaluated before and 2 weeks after surgery. The change in each parameter was compared between groups, while the difference in central corneal thickness and cornea-compensated intraocular pressure measured before and after surgery were considered as covariates.

RESULTS

A significant reduction was seen in the corneal stiffness parameter at first applanation, and an increase in deformation amplitude ratio (DAR), and integrated inverse radius (IIR) in both groups after surgery (p < 0.001) Changes in DAR, and IIR were significantly greater in the SMILE than in the PRK group (p < 0.001) Corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) decreased in both SMILE and PRK groups after surgery, (p < 0.001) with no statistically significant difference between groups (p > 0.05) Among new Corvis ST parameters, DAR showed a significant correlation with changes in Ambrosio relational thickness in both groups (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques caused significant changes in corneal biomechanics in the early postoperative period, with greater elastic changes in the SMILE group compared to the PRK group, likely due to lower tension in the SMILE cap and thinner residual stromal bed in SMILE. There were no differences in viscoelastic changes between them, so the lower CH may reflect the volume of tissue removed.

Refractive outcomes of small lenticule extraction (SMILE) Pro® with a 2 MHz femtosecond laser

PURPOSE

To evaluate the initial visual outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) Pro® using a 2 MHz femtosecond laser (VisuMax 800, Carl Zeiss Meditec) and to assess the efficacy, safety, predictability, accuracy, and complication rate.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included eyes which underwent the SMILE Pro® procedure using VisuMax 800 femtosecond laser to correct myopia. All surgeries were performed by one surgeon (DB). Follow-up was conducted 3 months postoperatively to evaluate visual outcomes after neuroadaptation, corrected visual acuity (CDVA) and intra- and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-two eyes of 82 patients (mean age 31 ± 6 years) results at 3 months are presented. The mean spherical equivalent (SE) was - 4.44 ± 1.86 D preoperatively while -0.24 ± 0.32 D postoperatively. 99% of eyes achieved SE within ± 1.0 D of attempted correction and 91% were within ± 0.5 D. Efficacy index was 0.93 while the safety index was 1. No complications occurred intra- or postoperatively. No eyes lost more than 1 line of their preoperative CDVA. All highly myopic eyes (- 6.25 to - 10.00 D; n = 18) achieved 20/20 at 3 months postoperatively and were within 0.5 D from the attempted SE and no eyes lost more than 1 line of CDVA.

CONCLUSION

The SMILE Pro® is a safe, efficient, and predictable procedure for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism, with comparable results of conventional SMILE surgery. High myopic eyes achieve better results than low and moderate myopia. No complications were recorded in our patients.

Modeling the biomechanics of laser corneal refractive surgery

We present a finite element model of the human cornea used to simulate corneal refractive surgery according to the three most diffused laser procedures, i. e., photo-refractive keratectomy (PRK), laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). The geometry used for the model is patient-specific in terms of anterior and posterior surfaces of the cornea and intrastromal surfaces originated by the planned intervention. The customization of the solid model prior to finite element discretization avoids the struggling difficulties associated with the geometrical modification induced by cutting, incision and thinning. Important features of the model include the identification of the stress-free geometry and an adaptive compliant limbus to account for the surrounding tissues. By the way of simplification, we adopt a Hooke material model extended to the finite kinematics, and consider only the preoperative and short-term postoperative conditions, disregarding the remodeling and material evolution aspects typical of biological tissues. Albeit simple and incomplete, the approach demonstrates that the post-operative biomechanical state of the cornea, after the creation of a flap or the removal of a small lenticule, is strongly modified with respect to the preoperative state and characterized by displacement irregularities and stress localizations.

Impact of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for High Myopia on Intraocular Pressure Measurements With Pneumotonometry

PURPOSE

To evaluate the medium-term impact of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) on air-puff tonometry (APT) and how it may be corrected.

METHODS

In this controlled prospective study, 69 eyes from 69 patients treated with SMILE for high myopia (mean: -7.22 diopters) were included. Central corneal thickness (CCT), spherical equivalent refraction (SEQ), corneal power, and intraocular pressure (IOP) (assessed by APT) were measured before and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The measured IOP decreased significantly after SMILE surgery (mean: -6.43 mm Hg), indicating a significant underestimation of the true IOP by APT. There was a significant correlation between change in SEQ, CCT, and apparent IOP. Correcting the apparent IOP measurement by applying a multiple regression correction did not provide significantly better estimates compared to adding 6.4 mm Hg to the measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that previous SMILE surgery should be considered when interpreting APT measurements, because the measurements underestimate the true IOP. Multiple regressions cannot estimate the true IOP with certainty. For screening purposes, adding 6.4 mm Hg to the apparent IOP of a patient treated for high myopia may be sufficient. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(9):606-611.].

Comparative study of small incision refractive lenticule extraction with 5 mm versus 6.5 mm optic zone for myopia

Purpose

To compare residual stromal thickness (RST) in eyes undergoing small incision refractive lenticule extraction (SMILE) using a lenticular diameter of 6.5 mm versus those with a diameter of 5 mm.

Methods: In this retrospective

comparative case series.

, consecutive

patients who underwent SMILE between 2016 and 2021 with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Preoperative best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), refractive error, contrast sensitivity, central corneal thickness, keratometry, higher order aberrations, and scotopic pupil size were recorded using a Placido disk topography with Sheimpflug tomography-based system. Patients underwent SMILE with a lenticular diameter of 6.5 mm until 2018 (n = 372 eyes). Thereafter, the lenticular diameter was reduced to 5 mm (n = 318). The RST, postoperative refraction, aberrations, subjective glare, and halos were compared across groups at 1 and 6 months.

Results

The mean age of participants was 26.8 ± 5.8 years with a mean preoperative spherical equivalent of -4.48 D ± 2.16 D (range: -0.75 to -12.25 D) and mean scotopic pupil of 3.7 ± 0.75 mm. Eyes in the 5 mm group had 30.6 m (95% confidence interval [CI] = 28 to 33 m, P < 0.001) greater RST compared to the 6.5 mm group after adjusting for spherical equivalent and preoperative pachymetry. There were no differences in vision, contrast sensitivity, aberrations (wavefront error of 0.19 ± 0.2 vs. 0.25 ± 0.2, P = 0.19) or glare between the two groups.

Conclusion

SMILE performed with a lenticular diameter of 5 mm leads to greater RST across the myopic range, but without inducing significant higher-order aberrations.

Corneal Biomechanics After SMILE, Femtosecond-Assisted LASIK, and Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Matched Comparison Study

Purpose

To evaluate the change in corneal stiffness after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).

Methods

Age, gender, spherical equivalent, and central corneal thickness (CCT)-matched cases undergoing SMILE with a 120-µ cap, FS-LASIK with a 110-µ flap, and PRK were enrolled. One-year change in the stress-strain index, stiffness parameter at first applanation, integrated inverse radius, deformation amplitude ratio at 2 mm, and deformation amplitude ratio at 1 mm were compared between the surgical groups by linear mixed-effect models.

Results

Within each surgical group, 120 eyes completed 1 year of follow-up. The residual stromal bed (RSB) thickness and (RSB/CCTpostop) were 348.1 ± 35.0 (0.74), 375.4 ± 31.0 (0.77) and 426.7 ± 2 µm (0.88) after SMILE, FS-LASIK, and PRK, respectively. The 1-year change in all biomechanical indices was significant, except the stress-strain index with PRK (P = 0.884). The change in all indices with SMILE were significantly greater than with FS-LASIK and with PRK (all P < 0.01), except the deformation amplitude ratio at 1 mm change between SMILE and FS-LASIK (P = 0.075). The changes in all indices with FS-LASIK were significantly greater than with PRK (all P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Although SMILE preserves the greatest amount of anterior cornea with a cap thickness of 120 µ, this also produces the smallest RSB and the greatest decrease in stiffness. Thus, the RSB is shown to be the predominant determinant of stiffness decreases, rather than the preserved anterior cornea. We recommend using a thinner cap to achieve a thicker RSB and a lesser decrease in the corneal stiffness in the SMILE procedure.

Translational Relevance

After refractive surgery, RSB is predominant determinant of stiffness decreases, rather than the preserved anterior cornea.

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.

Clinical Evaluation of Corneal Biomechanics following Laser Refractive Surgery in Myopic Eyes: A Review of the Literature

The role of corneal biomechanics in laser vision correction (LVC) is currently being raised in the assessment of postoperative corneal ectasia risk. The aim of the paper was to evaluate the changes in corneal biomechanics after LVC procedures based on a systematic review of current studies. The results of a search of the literature in the PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases were selected for final consideration according to the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram. Included in our review were 17 prospective clinical studies, with at least 6 months of follow-up time. Corneal biomechanical properties were assessed by Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA), or Corvis ST. The results of the study revealed the highest corneal biomechanics reduction after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) followed by small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and surface procedures, such as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASEK). In SMILE procedure treatment planning, the use of thicker caps preserves the corneal biomechanics. Similarly, reduction of flap thickness in LASIK surgery maintains the corneal biomechanical strength. Future prospective clinical trials with standardization of the study groups and surgical parameters are needed to confirm the results of the current review.

Quantitative Evaluation of In Vivo Corneal Biomechanical Properties after SMILE and FLEx Surgery by Acoustic Radiation Force Optical Coherence Elastography

The purpose of this study is to quantitatively evaluate the differences in corneal biomechanics after SMILE and FLEx surgery using an acoustic radiation force optical coherence elastography system (ARF-OCE) and to analyze the effect of the corneal cap on the integrity of corneal biomechanical properties. A custom ring array ultrasound transducer is used to excite corneal tissue to produce Lamb waves. Depth-resolved elastic modulus images of the in vivo cornea after refractive surgery were obtained based on the phase velocity of the Lamb wave. After refractive surgery, the average elastic modulus of the corneal flap decreased (71.7 ± 24.6 kPa), while the elastic modulus of the corneal cap increased (219.5 ± 54.9 kPa). The average elastic modulus of residual stromal bed (RSB) was increased after surgery, and the value after FLEx (305.8 ± 48.5 kPa) was significantly higher than that of SMILE (221.3 ± 43.2 kPa). Compared with FLEx, SMILE preserved most of the anterior stroma with less change in corneal biomechanics, which indicated that SMILE has an advantage in preserving the integrity of the corneal biomechanical properties. Therefore, the biomechanical properties of the cornea obtained by the ARF-OCE system may be one of the essential indicators for evaluating the safety of refractive surgery.

Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure are altered in silicone-hydrogel soft contact lenses wearers

PURPOSE

The aim of this work is to determinate the effects in the physical parameters in terms of intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) and corneal biomechanics in terms of corneal resistance factor (CRF) and corneal hysteresis (CH) of wearing silicone-hydrogel soft contact lenses (SiH-CLs) in young adult subjects during a short-term follow-up.

METHODS

40 eyes of 20 healthy patients with a mean age of 22.87 ± 4.14 were involved in this study. Subjects with corneal diseases, dry eye, irregular astigmatism or who have been previous contact lens wearers were excluded. The ocular response analyzer (Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments) was used to measure CH, CRF and IOP and Scheimpflug imaging (the GALILEI™ Dual Scheimpflug camera analyzer, Ziemer) was used to measure CCT before and 10 days (Group 1) and 20 days (Group 2) after wearing the SiH-CLs.

RESULTS

IOP was significantly decreased 10 days after using the SiH-CLs (p = 0.009). Within the 20 days' period, Group 2 revealed an even more pronounced decrease in IOP (p = 0.003) while CH increased significantly (p = 0.04). CCT and CRF did not show a significant change during the period of SiH-CLs use. Our finding allowed obtaining an empirical expression that relates IOP, CCT, CRF and CH within a biomechanical compensation experimental model.

CONCLUSIONS

Corneal biomechanical parameters and physical properties of the cornea may be altered due to SiH-CLs use. Our findings could have an impact on the management of glaucoma progression and ocular hypertension.

Survival analysis of myopic regression after small incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis for low to moderate myopia

BACKGROUND

To report the predictive factors of myopic regression in patients who had undergone small incision lenticular extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileuses (FS-LASIK) after 3-12 months of follow-up.

METHODS

This retrospective case series study recruited patients with a subjective sphere of - 1.00 to - 6.00 D myopia. SMILE was performed in 1629 eyes of 1629 patients with a subjective refraction spherical equivalent (SEQ) of - 4.57 ± 1.20 D and 1414 eyes of 1414 patients with a subjective SEQ of - 4.53 ± 1.26 D in FS-LASIK. Refractive outcomes were recorded at 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Predictors affecting myopic regression and other covariates were estimated with a Cox proportional hazard (Cox PH) model for the two surgical methods.

RESULTS

At 12 months, no significant difference was evident in the efficacy (P = 0.934), predictability (P = 0.733), or stability (P = 0.66) between FS-LASIK and SMILE. The survival rates were 83.7% in the FS-LASIK group and 88.1% in the SMILE group. Multivariate analysis by the Cox PH model revealed a similar probability of postoperative myopic regression with SMILE or FS-LASIK (P = 0.630). Predictors of myopic regression included preoperative higher-order aberration root mean square with 3 mm pupil diameter (pre-HOA-RMS₃) (P = 0.004), anterior chamber depth (ACD) (P = 0.015), pre-subjective sphere (P = 0.016), corneal diameter (P = 0.016), optical zone (OZ) (P = 0.02), and predicted depth of ablation (DA) (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

SMILE and FS-LASIK had a similar risk of myopic regression for low to moderate myopia. Pre-HOA-RMS₃, ACD, pre-subjective sphere, corneal diameter, OZ, and predicted DA were predictors of myopic regression.

Corneal Remodeling After Myopic SMILE Versus FS-LASIK: A Spatial Analysis of Short- and Mid-Term Corneal Thickness, Volume, and Shape Changes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the short- and mid-term changes of corneal thickness spatial profile (CTSP), corneal volume distribution (CVD), and corneal asphericity after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of myopia and astigmatism and compare the results with femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK).

METHOD

Thirty eyes of 18 patients who underwent SMILE were compared with a group of 30 eyes of 16 patients who underwent FS-LASIK. The groups were matched for preoperative central corneal thickness and lenticule thickness/ablation depth. Scheimpflug corneal tomography was performed preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 months and 3 years. The CTSP was evaluated on 4 concentric rings (2, 4, 6, and 8 mm). The CVD was evaluated at 3 concentric zones (3, 5, and 7 mm). Changes in the anterior and posterior asphericity at a 6-mm zone were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Between the 2-month and 3-year examination, the CTSP showed a similar increase for both groups at all measured points and rings ( P ≥ 0.168). The CVD also showed a similar increase for both groups at all measured zones ( P ≥ 0.278). The anterior corneal asphericity remained stable after SMILE (2-mo Q = 0.46 ± 0.27; 3-yr Q = 0.45 ± 0.27; P = 0.711) but decreased significantly after FS-LASIK (2-mo Q = 0.52 ± 0.47; 3-yr Q = 0.47 ± 0.44; P = 0.028). Similarly, the posterior corneal asphericity remained stable after SMILE (2-mo Q = -0.11 ± 0.15; 3-yr Q = -0.11 ± 0.13; P = 0.902) but decreased significantly after FS-LASIK (2-mo Q = -0.13 ± 0.14; 3-yr Q = -0.16 ± 0.15; P = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

CTSP and CVD between the 2-month and 3-year examination showed a similar increase after SMILE and FS-LASIK. During the postoperative course, the anterior and posterior corneal asphericity remained more stable after SMILE compared with FS-LASIK.

Monson small-incision lenticule extraction fixation device

Small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is a stromal based, flapless, minimally invasive form of laser vision correction for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. SMILE surgery is a more technical procedure compared with other refractive surgeries and generally has a longer skill mastery acquisition period. Thus far, no new stabilization devices or techniques have been proposed. To rectify this, a new distal corneal countertraction device for SMILE surgery, the Monson SMILE Fixation Device, is introduced. This device provides reliable corneal and globe stabilization during delamination and lenticular dissection. It may minimize tissue distortion and manipulation, simplify lenticule dissection, and may decrease operation times and improve cosmesis. Countertraction can also easily be adjusted throughout the procedure.

7-Year Results of SMILE for High Myopia: Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Aberrations

PURPOSE

To evaluate the 7-year visual, refractive, and optical outcomes following small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for high myopia and myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

Sixty-nine eyes (69 patients) undergoing SMILE between March 2011 and January 2012 at Aarhus University Hospital were included. Preoperative, 3-month, 3-year, and 7-year evaluation included: manifest refraction and uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, total corneal refractive power (TCRP), average keratometry (Km), aberrations, and central corneal thickness (CCT).

RESULTS

Preoperative spherical equivalent averaged -7.53 ± 1.18 diopters (D). Twenty-seven eyes were targeted emmetropia. In the emmetropic eyes, the postoperative logMAR UDVA remained stable (P = .11). When including all eyes, UDVA became worse from 3 to 7 years (3 months: 0.050 ± 0.16 logMAR; 3 years: 0.044 ± 0.21 logMAR; 7 years: 0.131 ± 0.29 logMAR; P < .027), whereas CDVA remained stable (3 months: -0.07 ± 0.09 logMAR; 3 years: -0.09 ± 0.08 logMAR; 7 years: -0.09 ± 0.08 logMAR, P > .99). At 7 years, 59.4% and 81.2% were within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D of target refraction, respectively. Average refractive regression was significant from 3 months to 7 years (-0.34 ± 0.69 D) and from 3 to 7 years (-0.25 ± 0.41 D, P < .05). After exclusion of three outliers with high myopic correction (< 9.63 D) and considerable regression (<-1.50 D), the average regression over 7 years was -0.25 ± 0.49 D (P = .004) with no significant change from 3 to 7 years (P = .069). Average CCT, TCRP, and anterior Km significantly increased (P < .001), whereas the posterior Km and total corneal aberrations remained stable (P > .092).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term visual outcome remained stable after SMILE, but with an average regression of -0.34 D over 7 years. A minor group with high myopic correction exhibited considerable refractive regression years after SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(10):654-661.].

Impact of extreme (flat and steep) keratometry on the safety and efficacy of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE)

Little is known about the connection between preoperative keratometry and postoperative results of myopic small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). To determine the influence of extreme (flat and steep) corneal keratometry on the safety and efficacy of SMILE, the databases of the Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Germany, and SMILE Eyes Linz, Austria, were screened for patients with steep and flat keratometry who had undergone SMILE. In this cross-sectional matched comparative cohort study, eyes with markedly flat (< 42.0 diopters; D) or steep (≥ 47.0D) preoperative corneal keratometry were matched to a cohort of eyes with regular keratometry (42.0-46.9D) by preoperative manifest refractive spherical equivalent and cylinder, age, corrected distance visual acuity and surgical SMILE parameters. The standardized graphs and terms for refractive surgery results were applied to compare the three groups. Changes in higher order aberrations (HOAs) were evaluated on Scheimpflug imaging. In total, 63 eyes (21 each) of 54 patients with a mean refractive spherical equivalent of  - 5.21 ± 1.59 D were followed up for a mean of 9.2 ± 6.1 (minimum ≥ 3) months. Mean baseline keratometry was 41.3 ± 0.7D (flat), 45.5 ± 1.0D (regular) and 47.7 ± 0.6D (steep) (p < 0.0001). Compared to the regular group, the flat and the steep cornea group resulted in a non-inferior percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D of target refraction (p = 0.20), uncorrected distance visual acuity (p = 0.95) and corrected distance visual acuity (p = 0.20). Flat corneas however experienced a stronger induction of spherical aberration (SA) compared to the steep group (p = 0.0005). In conclusion, non-inferior outcomes of SMILE can also be expected in eyes with steep (≥ 47D) or flat (< 42D) preoperative keratometry, while SMILE however induces more SA in eyes with a flat keratometry.

A review of corneal biomechanics: Mechanisms for measurement and the implications for refractive surgery

Detailed clinical assessment of corneal biomechanics has the potential to revolutionize the ophthalmic industry through enabling quicker and more proficient diagnosis of corneal disease, safer and more effective surgical treatments, and the provision of customized and optimized care. Despite these wide-ranging benefits, and an outstanding clinical need, the provision of technology capable of the assessment of corneal biomechanics in the clinic is still in its infancy. While laboratory-based technologies have progressed significantly over the past decade, there remain significant gaps in our knowledge regarding corneal biomechanics and how they relate to shape and function, and how they change in disease and after surgical intervention. Here, we discuss the importance, relevance, and challenges associated with the assessment of corneal biomechanics and review the techniques currently available and underdevelopment in both the laboratory and the clinic.

SMILE Versus Implantable Collamer Lens Implantation for High Myopia: A Matched Comparative Study

PURPOSE

To compare the safety, efficacy, and patient-reported quality of vision of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and implantable Collamer lens (ICL) implantation for the treatment of high myopia.

METHODS

A database of 1,634 SMILE (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) and 225 ICL implantation (STAAR Surgical, Monrovia, CA) procedures was screened for patients with a binocular preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent between -6.00 and -10.00 diopters (D) and plano target refraction. One-to-one matching was performed by preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent, age, and pupil size. All identified patients were then prospectively examined at their next regular postoperative follow-up visit and presented with the standardized and clinically validated Quality of Vision questionnaire to gauge patient-reported postoperative visual quality.

RESULTS

A total of 80 eyes (40 patients) were eligible for 1:1 matching. Mean postoperative follow-up was 27.8 ± 14.3 months in the SMILE group and 26.6 ± 17.7 months in the ICL group (P = .44). Regarding the percentage of eyes within ±0.50 D of plano target, refractive predictability was better in eyes treated with ICL implantation (90%) than SMILE (72.5%) (P = .045). Mean UDVA was comparable (ICL: -0.09 ± 0.10 logMAR; SMILE: -0.06 ± 0.09 logMAR; P < .09), but the efficacy (1.28 vs 1.05; P < .001) and safety (1.31 ± 0.22 vs 1.10 ± 0.25; P < .001) indices were higher after ICL implantation. ICL implantation induced significantly fewer higher order aberrations (total higher order aberrations: SMILE 0.724 ± 0.174 µm vs ICL 0.436 ± 0.114 µm; P < .01). Regarding subjective quality of vision, patients who had ICL implantation were significantly less bothered by visual disturbances, which were mainly halos after ICL and starbursts and fluctuations of vision after SMILE (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this refraction-matched comparative study, ICL implantation for high myopia yielded better refractive accuracy, better uncorrected distance visual acuity, fewer higher order aberrations, and better subjective quality of vision than SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(3):150-159.].

Dynamic corneal biomechanics in different cell layers: in keratoconus and normal eyes

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the relationship between corneal cellular structures and biomechanical deformation parameters in keratoconic (KC) and healthy eyes.

METHODS

In this prospective comparative study, 29 eyes of 29 KC patients were age- and gender-matched with 28 eyes of 28 healthy individuals using frequency matching. Corneal parameters examined included the density of basal epithelial cells, anterior keratocytes, posterior keratocytes and endothelial cells as assessed by in vivo corneal confocal microscopy (HRT III-RCM, Heidelberg Engineering, www.heidelbergengineering.com). Additionally, the coefficient of variation of endothelial cell size (CV) and the percentage of hexagonal endothelial cells (HEX%) were measured by specular microscopy (Konan NSP-9900, Konan Medical, www.konanmedical.com). Further, biomechanical deformation parameters were derived from Corvis Scheimpflug Technology (Corvis ST, Oculus, www.oculus.de). All cellular and biomechanical deformation parameters in KC and normal groups were compared, and the relationship between cellular and biomechanical parameters calculated.

RESULTS

In the KC group, the highest concavity (HC) delta arc length and maximum delta arc length were associated with endothelial cell density (Beta = -0.39, p = 0.03 and Beta = -0.60, p ˂ 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, there was a significant association between HC deflection length and HEX% (Beta = -0.67, p = 0.001). In the normal group, HC delta arc length and HC deflection length were significantly associated with endothelial cell density (Beta = 0.46, p = 0.02; and Beta = -0.51, p = 0.01, respectively). HC time, HC deformation amplitude and applanation 1 delta arc length were associated with CV (Beta = 0.50, p = 0.01; Beta = 0.27, p = 0.009; and Beta = -0.57, p = 0.002, respectively). Applanation 1 and applanation 2 deformation amplitudes were associated with HEX% (Beta = -0.49, p = 0.005; and Beta = -0.46, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Biomechanical deformation parameters were significantly correlated with endothelial cell properties in both KC and normal groups, thereby indicating the importance of the integrity of endothelial cells to the biomechanical properties of both KC and normal corneas.

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.

Comparison of corneal biomechanical changes after LASIK and F-SMILE with CorVis ST

PURPOSE

To evaluate changes in corneal biomechanics after LASIK and F-SMILE.

SETTING

Elite Eye Center, Tanta, Egypt.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, unmasked, interventional comparative case series.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 60 eyes were equally divided into two groups; group A: received LASIK and group B: received F-SMILE. Pentacam and CorVis ST parameters were compared before and 6 months after procedures. P ⩽ 0.05 was used for significance of results.

RESULTS

bIOP decreased by 0.762 ± 1.211 mmHg in group A (p = 0.092), and by 2.52 ± 1.389 mmHg in group B (p < 0.001) and the difference between groups became significant (p = 0.001). A1 increased significantly in group A only (p = 0.036); while A2 decreased insignificantly in both groups. DAR increased significantly in both groups (p < 0.001, p = 0.022), but the difference between groups remained insignificant (p = 0.461). IR increased significantly in group A only (p < 0.001) and the difference between groups became significant (p = 0.026). ARTH decreased in both groups (p = 0.245, p = 0.695) and the difference remained insignificant (p = 0.928). SP-A1 decreased in group A by 8.89 ± 1.38 mmHg/mm (p = 0.637), and by 32.6 ± 4.39 mmHg/mm in group B (p < 0.001) and the postoperative difference between groups was significant (p = 0.013). CBI increased significantly in group A (p < 0.001), but insignificantly in group B (p = 0.098) and postoperative difference between groups was highly significant (p < 0.001). A significant correlation was found between change in CCT and corresponding changes in DAR, IR, and ARTH after surgery in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The significant differences between groups postoperatively as regards bIOP (p = 0.001), IR (p = 0.026), SP-A1 (p = 0.013), and CBI (p < 0.001) indicate stiffer corneas after F-SMILE and suggest less influence on corneal biomechanics than LASIK.

Corneal Biomechanical Properties after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery on Thin Cornea

PURPOSE

To explore the biomechanical changes in thin corneas after the small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery.

METHODS

This prospective survey screened patients scheduled for the SMILE surgery from November 2017 to March 2018. Patients with thin corneas (central corneal thickness [CCT] ≤500 μm) and those with normal corneal thickness (CCT > 500 μm) were enrolled. Corneal biomechanics were examined by the ocular response analyser and Corvis ST, preoperatively and at 1 day, 3 weeks, and 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients (46 eyes) with mean spherical equivalent of -5.1 ± 1.7 D were assigned to the thin cornea group, and 28 (45 eyes) cases with mean spherical equation of -5.3 ± 1.8 D were assigned to the control group. Safety and efficacy did not differ between the two age- and refraction-matched groups (safety index, 1.15 ± 0.14 vs 1.14 ± 0.17 [P = .7]; efficacy index, 1.11 ± 0.13 vs 1.16 ± 0.22 [P = .2]). All biomechanical parameters changed significantly after SMILE. The thin cornea group showed less decrease in the second applanation time (A2 Time), stiffness parameters at first applanation (SP-A1). Pooling data from two groups, lower CCT was correlated with less A2 Time change (r = 0.37, P < .01) and less SP-A1 change (r = -0.33, P < .01). Less bIOP change was correlated with higher residual stromal thickness index and thicker CCT (P = .003, R² = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

Over a short-term observation period, less corneal biomechanic deterioration may have contributed to the safety of SMILE on thin cornea.

Lutein Supplementation for Eye Diseases

Lutein is one of the few xanthophyll carotenoids that is found in high concentration in the macula of human retina. As de novo synthesis of lutein within the human body is impossible, lutein can only be obtained from diet. It is a natural substance abundant in egg yolk and dark green leafy vegetables. Many basic and clinical studies have reported lutein's anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory properties in the eye, suggesting its beneficial effects on protection and alleviation of ocular diseases such as age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, retinopathy of prematurity, myopia, and cataract. Most importantly, lutein is categorized as Generally Regarded as Safe (GRAS), posing minimal side-effects upon long term consumption. In this review, we will discuss the chemical structure and properties of lutein as well as its application and safety as a nutritional supplement. Finally, the effects of lutein consumption on the aforementioned eye diseases will be reviewed.

The Differential Expression of Cytokines and Growth Factors After SMILE Compared With FS-LASIK in Rabbits

Purpose

To investigate the differential expression of cytokines and growth factors in the cornea and aqueous humor after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) compared with femtosecond LASIK (FS-LASIK) using rabbit model.

Methods

Sixteen eyes of 16 rabbits in each group underwent SMILE or FS-LASIK with refractive correction of −6.00 DS/−1.00 DC. Eight additional rabbits served as controls. Pre- and 24 hours, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively, slit-lamp and anterior segment optical coherence tomography were performed, followed by cornea and aqueous humor collection. Apoptosis and proliferation were evaluated with TUNEL assay and Ki-67 immunostaining, respectively. The mRNA and protein expression of cytokines and growth factors was determined by RT-qPCR and Western blotting, respectively. Cytokine levels in the aqueous humor were detected with ELISA.

Results

Compared with FS-LASIK, SMILE induced less apoptosis and proliferation in the cornea within 1 week postoperatively. Levels of IL-1β, TNF-α, and EGFR in the cornea were significantly increased after FS-LASIK compared with SMILE within 24 hours. Levels of IL-8 in the aqueous humor remained elevated until 1 week after FS-LASIK but not SMILE. TGF-β1 level was elevated up to 1 month after both procedures, while BFGF level was kept high within 1 month after SMILE but not FS-LASIK.

Conclusions

SMILE could induce significantly less acute inflammation than FS-LASIK in the cornea and aqueous humor. The differential expression of TGF-β1 and BFGF between two procedures until 1 month might contribute to the post-SMILE delayed recovery and underline the importance of continued treatment postoperatively.

Enhancement Options After Myopic Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE): A Review

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of the currently available retreatment methods after myopic small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

METHODS

The PubMed library was searched for articles containing the terms "small-incision lenticule extraction" and "enhancement" or "retreatment". The last search was performed on May 1, 2019.

RESULTS

In contrast to laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), which can be retreated by a flap relift, repeat SMILE retreatment is currently not approved and only seldomly performed. As substitutes, surface ablation, cap-to-flap conversion using the CIRCLE program in the VisuMax platform, and thin-flap LASIK have been recently established. While all options offer safety and efficacy comparable to LASIK retreatments, each has its patient-specific advantages and disadvantages. While surface ablation preserves the flap-free approach of the primary procedure, the aspect of pain and a slow visual recovery might render it less attractive as compared with CIRCLE and thin-flap LASIK which offer quick recovery, however at the price of flap creation. Besides, each retreatment method generates specific tissue responses and has a different impact on corneal biomechanics, which is strongly dependent on the previous SMILE parameters, especially the cap thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

Refractive enhancement after SMILE is currently mostly performed by surface ablation, CIRCLE cap-to-flap conversion or thin-flap LASIK, which all offer safety and efficacy comparable to LASIK retreatments. In this review, a detailed overview over each method, its technical aspects, and specific advantages and disadvantages is given.

Corneal biomechanical properties after SMILE versus FLEX, LASIK, LASEK, or PRK: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative corneal biomechanical properties between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and other corneal refractive surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Articles from January 2005, to April 2019, were identified searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Studies that compared SMILE with other corneal refractive surgeries on adult myopia patients and evaluated corneal biomechanics were included. Multiple effect sizes in each study were combined. Random-effects model was conducted in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included: 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 9 prospective and 6 retrospective cohort studies, and 2 cross-sectional studies. Using the combined effect of corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF), which were obtained from ocular response analyzer (ORA), the pooled Hedges' g of SMILE versus femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.81; p = 0.049; I² = 78%), versus LASIK was 1.31 (95% CI, 0.54 to 2.08; p < 0.001; I² = 77%), versus femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEX) was - 0.01 (95% CI, - 0.31 to 0.30; p = 0.972; I² = 20%), and versus the group of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser-assisted sub-epithelial keratectomy (LASEK) was - 0.26 (95% CI, - 0.67 to 0.16; p = 0.230; I² = 54%). The summary score of Corvis ST (CST) after SMILE was comparable to FS-LASIK/LASIK with the pooled Hedges' g = - 0.05 (95% CI, - 0.24 to 0.14; p = 0.612, I² = 55%).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of preserving corneal biomechanical strength after surgeries, SMILE was superior to either FS-LASIK or LASIK, while comparable to FLEX or PRK/LASEK group based on the results from ORA. More studies are needed to apply CST on evaluating corneal biomechanics after refractive surgeries.

Surface Ablation Versus CIRCLE for Myopic Enhancement After SMILE: A Matched Comparative Study

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of enhancement after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) using surface ablation versus the VisuMax CIRCLE option (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany), which converts the SMILE cap into a femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis flap.

METHODS

The databases of the SMILE Eyes centers in Munich, Marburg, and Cologne, Germany, and Linz, Austria, were screened for eyes that had undergone enhancement using surface ablation with mitomycin C or CIRCLE. Eyes from both enhancement methods suitable for a retrospective matched analysis were identified based on pre-SMILE and pre-enhancement mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), astigmatism, age, and corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA/UDVA). Refractive and functional outcomes were compared after a follow-up of 3 months.

RESULTS

After the application of the matching criteria on 2,803 SMILE procedures, 24 eyes (12 in each group) with a follow-up of 3 months or longer were available for analysis. Enhancement was performed after a mean 9.7 ± 7.2 (surface ablation) and 11.0 ± 4.4 (CIRCLE) months for a residual MRSE of -0.91 ± 0.55 (surface ablation) and -0.90 ± 0.61 (CIRCLE) diopters. At 3 months, residual MRSE showed comparable accuracy with -0.07 ± 0.19 (surface ablation) and 0.04 ± 0.22 (CIRCLE) diopters (P = .18). UDVA improvement was similar to a final value of 0.02 ± 0.10 (surface ablation) versus 0.03 ± 0.07 (CIRCLE) logMAR (P = .78). Only one eye in the surface ablation group and no eye in the CIRCLE group lost one line of CDVA. At 3 months, the safety (surface ablation: 1.00, CIRCLE: 1.06; P = .36) and efficacy (surface ablation: 0.95, CIRCLE: 1.03; P = .36) indices were equivalent. In terms of speed of visual recovery, at week 1 UDVA and CDVA were significantly better after CIRCLE than surface ablation (P = .008 and .002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first study directly comparing surface ablation versus CIRCLE enhancement after SMILE, both methods yielded comparable results at 3 months. However, CIRCLE re-treated eyes showed a markedly increased speed of recovery concerning UDVA and CDVA compared to surface ablation. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(5):294-300.].