Functional Optical Zone and Centration Following SMILE and LASIK: A Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Study

被引:53
|
作者
Daingaard, Iben B. [1 ,2 ]
Ang, Marcus [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Malunoud, Ashraf M. [7 ,8 ]
Farook, Mohamed [2 ,3 ]
Roberts, Cynthia J. [7 ,8 ,9 ,10 ,11 ]
Mehta, Jodhbir S. [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Aarhus Univ Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Aarhus, Denmark
[2] Singapore Eye Res Inst, Singapore, Singapore
[3] Singapore Natl Eye Ctr, 11 Third Hosp Ave, Singapore 168751, Singapore
[4] Duke NUS Grad Med Sch, Dept Clin Sci, Singapore, Singapore
[5] Nanyang Technol Univ, Sch Mat Sci & Engn, Singapore, Singapore
[6] Nanyang Technol Univ, Sch Mech & Aerosp Engn, Singapore, Singapore
[7] Ohio State Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[8] Ohio State Univ, Dept Ophthalmol & Visual Sci, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[9] Oculus Optikgerate GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany
[10] Ziemer Ophthalm Syst AG, Port, Switzerland
[11] Optimeyes, Detroit, MI USA
关键词
INCISION LENTICULE EXTRACTION; IN-SITU KERATOMILEUSIS; LASER-ASSISTED LASIK; CORNEAL LIGHT REFLEX; ABLATION CENTRATION; MYOPIC LASIK; FS-LASIK; DECENTRATION; TRANSITION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.3928/1081597X-20190313-01
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To compare centration and functional optical zone (FOZ) after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, single-masked, paired-eyed, clinical trial, 70 patients received SMILE in one eye and LASIK in the other eye for myopia and myopic astigmatism. FOZ was calculated using custom software on 3-month postoperative refractive power maps (Pentacam HR; Oculus Optikgerate GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). Programmed treatment area was defined as the total area of the programmed OZ plus the transition zone. Centration was evaluated by the linear distance between FOZ centroid and the pupil center and the corneal apex. RESULTS: The average preoperative spherical equivalent (-5.38 +/- 1.65 vs -5.45 +/- 1.61 diopters [D]), postoperative spherical equivalent (0.05 +/- 0.39 vs 0.06 +/- 0.39 D), uncorrected distance visual acuity (0.01 +/- 0.13 vs 0.00 +/- 0.08 logMAR), and corrected distance visual acuity (-0.07 +/- 0.10 vs -0.07 +/- 0.10 logMAR) were comparable in SMILE- and LASIK-treated eyes of the 60 patients with complete datasets (P > .419). Postoperative increase in spherical aberration was lower in SMILE than in LASIK (0.08 +/- 0.16 vs 0.17 +/- 0.18 mu m, P = .002). The FOZ area was significantly larger in SMILE than in LASIK (30.25 +/- 3.60 vs 29.21 +/- 3.72 mm(2)), despite the smaller programmed OZ diameter (6.48 +/- 0.08 vs 6.52 +/- 0.11 mm) and smaller programmed treatment area (33.87 +/- 0.81 vs 46.30 +/- 2.61 mm(2), P < .037). Pupil centration (0.43 +/- 0.21 vs 0.41 +/- 0.22 mm) and apex centration (0.48 +/- 0.24 vs 0.48 +/- 0.22 mm) were comparable between SMILE and LASIK (P > .694). CONCLUSIONS: SMILE created a larger FOZ than LASIK, despite the smaller programmed OZ. This may be due to a difference in the biomechanical response between the two procedures. Visual outcome and centration were comparable between SMILE and LASIK.
引用
收藏
页码:230 / 238
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of Planned Versus Achieved Central Stromal Thickness Reduction in LASIK Versus SMILE: A ContralateraL Eye Study
    Zisimopoulos, Athanasios
    Vingopoulos, Filippos
    Kanellopoulos, Anastasios John
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2021, 37 (07) : 454 - 459
  • [22] Decentration of Optical Zone Center and Its Impact on Visual Outcomes Following SMILE
    Liu, Manli
    Sun, Yuan
    Wang, Danyang
    Zhang, Ting
    Zhou, Yugui
    Zheng, Hua
    Liu, Quan
    CORNEA, 2015, 34 (04) : 392 - 397
  • [23] Prospective, Randomized, Double-blind, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Myopic LASIK With Optimized Aspheric or Prolate Ablations
    Chayet, Arturo
    Bains, Harkaran S.
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2012, 28 (02) : 112 - U100
  • [24] Effect of corneal curvature on optical zone decentration and its impact on astigmatism and higher-order aberrations in SMILE and LASIK
    Chan, Tommy C. Y.
    Wan, Kelvin H.
    Kang, David S. Y.
    Tso, Tiffany H. K.
    Cheng, George P. M.
    Wang, Yan
    GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2019, 257 (01) : 233 - 240
  • [25] Influence of Cap Thickness on Corneal Curvature and Corneal Biomechanics After SMILE: A Prospective, Contralateral Eye Study
    Wu, De
    Liu, Chunlei
    Li, Bin
    Wang, Diya
    Fang, Xuejun
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 36 (02) : 82 - +
  • [26] Prospective Contralateral Eye Study to Compare 80-and 120-μm Flap LASIK Using the VisuMax Femtosecond Laser
    Lim, Dong Hui
    Keum, Ji Eun
    Ju, Won-Kyung
    Lee, Jeong-Hye
    Md, Tae-Young Chung
    Chung, Eui-Sang
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 29 (07) : 462 - U26
  • [27] Comparison of Forward Light Scatter Changes Between SMILE, Femtosecond Laser-assisted LASIK, and Epipolis LASIK: Results of a 1-Year Prospective Study
    Xu, Lulu
    Wang, Yan
    Li, Jing
    Liu, Yangchen
    Wu, Wenjing
    Zhang, Hui
    Wu, Yanan
    Khan, Gauhar Ali
    JOURNAL OF REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 31 (11) : 752 - U103
  • [28] Comparison of the optical quality after SMILE and FS-LASIK for high myopia by OQAS and iTrace analyzer: a one-year retrospective study
    Yin, Yewei
    Lu, Ying
    Xiang, Aiqun
    Fu, Yanyan
    Zhao, Yang
    Li, Yuanjun
    Hu, Tu
    Du, Kaixuan
    Hu, Shengfa
    Fu, Qiuman
    Wu, Xiaoying
    Wen, Dan
    BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2021, 21 (01)
  • [29] Visual and refractive outcomes after SMILE versus FS-LASIK: a paired-eye study
    Ramirez-Miranda, Arturo
    Mota, Angie De-la
    Rosa, Guillermo Garcia-De la
    Serna-Ojeda, Juan C.
    Valdez-Garcia, Jorge E.
    Fabregas-Sanchez-Woodworth, Daniela
    Navas, Alejandro
    Jimenez-Corona, Aida
    Graue-Hernandez, Enrique O.
    CIRUGIA Y CIRUJANOS, 2024, 92 (06): : 758 - 768
  • [30] A Prospective, Contralateral Eye Study Comparing Thin-Flap LASIK (Sub-Bowman Keratomileusis) with Photorefractive Keratectomy
    Slade, Stephen G.
    Durrie, Daniel S.
    Binder, Perry S.
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2009, 116 (06) : 1075 - 1082