Dan Z Reinstein1,2,3,4, Timothy J Archer1, Ryan S Vida1, Glenn I Carp1. 1. London Vision Clinic, London, UK. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Sorbonne Université, Paris, France. 4. Biomedical Science Research Institute, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the incidence and outcomes of suction loss during small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). METHODS: The incidence of suction loss was measured over 4000 consecutive SMILE procedures and categorized by cause, the interface in which suction was lost and management (restart/continue SMILE, re-SMILE thinner cap, convert to laser in-situ keratomileusis [LASIK]). One-year outcomes were compared to the fellow eye where no suction loss occurred. RESULTS: There were 20 cases of suction loss (0.50%): during the lenticule interface in seven eyes, lenticule side cut in one eye, cap interface in nine eyes and small incision for three eyes. Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) was continued in seven eyes, thinner cap SMILE in four eyes, LASIK in eight eyes, and the small incision was manually completed in one eye. Suction loss was caused by a Bell's reflex in 10 eyes, fixation light tracking in six eyes, patient anxiety in two eyes, a nociceptive reflex in one eye and false suction in one eye. There was no difference in results for suction loss and fellow eyes, respectively: uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 100% in both groups, spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 85% and 79%, one line loss of corrected distance visual acuity in 5% and 0%, and no eyes lost two lines. CONCLUSION: Suction loss can be managed depending on the interface during which suction is lost. Treatment was completed on the same day in all instances. Visual and refractive outcomes were unaffected compared to the fellow eye in this series.
PURPOSE: To report the incidence and outcomes of suction loss during small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). METHODS: The incidence of suction loss was measured over 4000 consecutive SMILE procedures and categorized by cause, the interface in which suction was lost and management (restart/continue SMILE, re-SMILE thinner cap, convert to laser in-situ keratomileusis [LASIK]). One-year outcomes were compared to the fellow eye where no suction loss occurred. RESULTS: There were 20 cases of suction loss (0.50%): during the lenticule interface in seven eyes, lenticule side cut in one eye, cap interface in nine eyes and small incision for three eyes. Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) was continued in seven eyes, thinner cap SMILE in four eyes, LASIK in eight eyes, and the small incision was manually completed in one eye. Suction loss was caused by a Bell's reflex in 10 eyes, fixation light tracking in six eyes, patientanxiety in two eyes, a nociceptive reflex in one eye and false suction in one eye. There was no difference in results for suction loss and fellow eyes, respectively: uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 or better in 100% in both groups, spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 85% and 79%, one line loss of corrected distance visual acuity in 5% and 0%, and no eyes lost two lines. CONCLUSION: Suction loss can be managed depending on the interface during which suction is lost. Treatment was completed on the same day in all instances. Visual and refractive outcomes were unaffected compared to the fellow eye in this series.