• Something wrong with this record ?

Comparison of the efficiency of femtoLASIK and ReLEx SMILE in terms of dioptric error reduction

Z. Pavkova, J. Kacerovska, M. Kacerovsky

. 2018 ; 162 (4) : 329-334. [pub] 20180607

Language English Country Czech Republic

Document type Journal Article

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Refractive eye surgery is a rapidly expanding field of ophthalmology and corneal surgery is undergoing constant development leading to less invasive technologies. The goal of this study was to compare the most common femtoLASIK surgery with the newer ReLEx SMILE surgery which is gentler to the cornea. The comparison was made in terms of dioptric error reduction. METHODS: The studied cohort of patients consisted of two major groups: 30 patients who underwent femtoLASIK surgery and 30 who underwent ReLEx SMILE surgery. -30 patients, 60 eyes. All patients were aged 18-45 years with moderate myopia or astigmatism ranging from -3.25 to -6.0 spherical diopters and from 0 to -1.0 cylindrical diopters. In all, the best corrected visual acuity measured prior to surgery was 1.0. Pachymetry was not comparable because each surgical method was performed at a different time point and the introduction of an innovative method into practice led to a change in selection criteria. RESULTS: During postsurgical check-ups, the ReLEx SMILE method (0.74) led to lower values of non-corrected visual acuity compared to the femtoLASIK method (0.88), (P<0.001). However, the results changed at the one-year post-surgery check-up, when ReLEX SMILE patients achieved non-corrected visual acuity of 0.97 compared to femtoLASIK patients, who scored 0.83, (P=0.007). Based on data analysis from the automatic refractometer, the average spherical diopters of the femtoLASIK (-0.32 D) were higher than those of the ReLEx SMILE (-0.07 D), (P<0.001). The results for the cylindrical diopters were also significant, (P=0.021). When we compared the spherical equivalent one year after surgery, the difference between methods was significant. The FemtoLASIK method resulted in an average SE -0.55 D compared to -0.09 D for the ReLEx SMILE method, (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that there was a significant difference in results between the two surgical methods of treatment of moderate myopia and astigmatism, in terms of regression of dioptric error, as well as in achievement and maintenance of visual acuity during the observed period. The ReLEx SMILE had better results.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19011724
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20230316094852.0
007      
ta
008      
190404s2018 xr d f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.5507/bp.2018.027 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)29936526
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Pavkova, Zuzana $u The Horni Pocernice Eye Clinic, Prague, Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Comparison of the efficiency of femtoLASIK and ReLEx SMILE in terms of dioptric error reduction / $c Z. Pavkova, J. Kacerovska, M. Kacerovsky
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Refractive eye surgery is a rapidly expanding field of ophthalmology and corneal surgery is undergoing constant development leading to less invasive technologies. The goal of this study was to compare the most common femtoLASIK surgery with the newer ReLEx SMILE surgery which is gentler to the cornea. The comparison was made in terms of dioptric error reduction. METHODS: The studied cohort of patients consisted of two major groups: 30 patients who underwent femtoLASIK surgery and 30 who underwent ReLEx SMILE surgery. -30 patients, 60 eyes. All patients were aged 18-45 years with moderate myopia or astigmatism ranging from -3.25 to -6.0 spherical diopters and from 0 to -1.0 cylindrical diopters. In all, the best corrected visual acuity measured prior to surgery was 1.0. Pachymetry was not comparable because each surgical method was performed at a different time point and the introduction of an innovative method into practice led to a change in selection criteria. RESULTS: During postsurgical check-ups, the ReLEx SMILE method (0.74) led to lower values of non-corrected visual acuity compared to the femtoLASIK method (0.88), (P<0.001). However, the results changed at the one-year post-surgery check-up, when ReLEX SMILE patients achieved non-corrected visual acuity of 0.97 compared to femtoLASIK patients, who scored 0.83, (P=0.007). Based on data analysis from the automatic refractometer, the average spherical diopters of the femtoLASIK (-0.32 D) were higher than those of the ReLEx SMILE (-0.07 D), (P<0.001). The results for the cylindrical diopters were also significant, (P=0.021). When we compared the spherical equivalent one year after surgery, the difference between methods was significant. The FemtoLASIK method resulted in an average SE -0.55 D compared to -0.09 D for the ReLEx SMILE method, (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that there was a significant difference in results between the two surgical methods of treatment of moderate myopia and astigmatism, in terms of regression of dioptric error, as well as in achievement and maintenance of visual acuity during the observed period. The ReLEx SMILE had better results.
650    17
$a rohovka $x chirurgie $x patologie $7 D003315 $2 czmesh
650    17
$a refrakční chirurgické výkony $x metody $7 D054140 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a refrakční vady $x terapie $7 D012030 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a zraková ostrost $7 D014792 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a pooperační komplikace $7 D011183 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a kohortové studie $7 D015331 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a dospělí $7 D000328 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a lidé $7 D006801 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a mladiství $7 D000293 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297 $2 czmesh
650    _7
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260 $2 czmesh
653    00
$a FemtoLASIK
653    00
$a ReLEx SMILE
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Kacerovská, Jana $u The Horni Pocernice Eye Clinic, Prague, Czech Republic. $7 xx0227530
700    1_
$a Kacerovský, Martin, $u The Horni Pocernice Eye Clinic, Prague, Czech Republic. $d 1968- $7 mzk2009502318
773    0_
$w MED00012606 $t Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacký, Olomouc Czech Republic $x 1213-8118 $g Roč. 162, č. 4 (2018), s. 329-334
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29936526 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b A 1502 $c 958 $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20190404 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20230316094847 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1390871 $s 1050029
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 162 $c 4 $d 329-334 $e 20180607 $i 1213-8118 $m Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacký, Olomouc Czech Republic $n Biomed. Pap. Fac. Med. Palacký Univ. Olomouc Czech Repub. (Print) $x MED00012606
LZP    __
$c NLK182 $d 20230316 $b NLK198 $a Pubmed-20190404

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...