Literature DB >> 29425387

Intraoperative Patient Experience and Postoperative Visual Quality After SMILE and LASIK in a Randomized, Paired-Eye, Controlled Study.

Iben B Damgaard, Marcus Ang, Mohamed Farook, Hla M Htoon, Jodhbir S Mehta.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare intraoperative and postoperative subjective patient experience after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK.
METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, paired-eye, single-masked clinical trial at Singapore National Eye Centre, 70 patients were randomly treated with SMILE and LASIK in each eye. The intraoperative questionnaire was completed immediately after surgery and included light perception and levels of anxiety, fear, and discomfort. The postoperative 1- and 3-month questionnaires evaluated severity of light sensitivity, eye discomfort, eye dryness, excessive tearing, gritty sensation, glare, halos, blurring, and fluctuations in vision.
RESULTS: Average discomfort scores were higher during tissue manipulation in SMILE (1.9 ± 0.9) than flap lifting in LASIK (1.59 ± 0.8) (P = .020) but comparable during docking and laser application (P > .249). Fear scores were lower in SMILE than LASIK during docking (2.6 ± 1.6 vs 3.4 ± 1.9, P = .024) but similar during occasional blackout, laser application, and lenticule/flap manipulation (P > .364). Fear scores were generally higher in patients with intraoperative suction loss (n = 3). For SMILE, light sensitivity, eye discomfort, blurring, and fluctuations in vision improved from 1 to 3 months (P < .039). For LASIK, improvements were reported for light sensitivity, eye discomfort, eye dryness, gritty sensation, and fluctuations in vision from 1 to 3 months (P < .046). At 1 month, patients experienced more blurring after SMILE than LASIK (2.1 ± 0.8 vs 1.8 ± 0.7, P = .025), but with no differences in any of the visual symptoms at 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Tissue manipulation may be more uncomfortable during SMILE than LASIK, but not more frightening. Subjective visual symptoms were comparable after 3 months. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(2):92-99.]. Copyright 2018, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29425387     DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20171218-01

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Refract Surg        ISSN: 1081-597X            Impact factor:   3.573


  8 in total

Review 1.  Refractive surgery beyond 2020.

Authors:  Marcus Ang; Damien Gatinel; Dan Z Reinstein; Erik Mertens; Jorge L Alió Del Barrio; Jorge L Alió
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Uncorrected visual acuity, postoperative astigmatism, and dry eye symptoms are major determinants of patient satisfaction: a comparative, real-life study of femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis and small incision lenticule extraction for myopia.

Authors:  Juhani Pietilä; Anne Huhtala; Petri Mäkinen; Janika Nättinen; Teppo Rajala; Kalle Salmenhaara; Hannu Uusitalo
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-10

3.  Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes of Laser In Situ Keratomileusis and Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction: A Review.

Authors:  Nathalie P Y Chiam; Jodhbir S Mehta
Journal:  Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila)       Date:  2019 Sep-Oct

4.  Clinical outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction versus femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for high myopia: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yanyan Fu; Yewei Yin; Xiaoying Wu; Yuanjun Li; Aiqun Xiang; Ying Lu; Qiuman Fu; Tu Hu; Kaixuan Du; Dan Wen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye Comparison of Functional Optical Zone, and Visual Quality After SMILE and FS-LASIK for High Myopia.

Authors:  Shengyu He; Yiqi Luo; Pei Chen; Yiming Ye; Hua Zheng; Min Lan; Jing Zhuang; Keming Yu
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 3.283

6.  Clinical outcomes of the immediate reapplication of small-incision lenticule extraction without adjusting the surgical parameters after suction loss.

Authors:  Byunghoon Chung; Ik Hee Ryu; In Sik Lee; Jin Kuk Kim; Tae-Im Kim; Eung Kweon Kim; Kyoung Yul Seo; Ikhyun Jun
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-24       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 7.  Advances in refractive corneal lenticule extraction.

Authors:  Matthias Fuest; Jodhbir S Mehta
Journal:  Taiwan J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-04-24

8.  Comparison of Q-value-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis and standard laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kai-Ping Zhang; Xiang Fang; Yin Zhang; Min Chao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 1.817

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.