Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27992482›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Dry Eye after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) versus Femtosecond Laser-Assisted in Situ Keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for Myopia: A Meta-Analysis.

Zeren Shen, Yanan Zhu, Xiaohui Song, Jie Yan, Ke Yao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction - KLEx.Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Complications of small incision lenticule extraction.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Zeren ShenEye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Yanan ZhuEye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Xiaohui SongEye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Jie YanEye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Ke YaoEye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare dry eye after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK (FS-LASIK) for correcting myopia.

methodsCENTRAL, Embase and PubMed were searched in November 2016. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohorts that compared dry eye after SMILE with FS-LASIK were selected.

resultsFive cohorts and one RCT were identified for comparing dry eye after SMILE (291 eyes) and FS-LASIK (277 eyes). The pooled results revealed that the SMILE and FS-LASIK groups did not differ significantly in terms of Schirmer's I test (SIT) and tear film osmolarity (TFO) at any postoperative visits. By contrast, tear break up time (TBUT; p = 0.04 for one month, p < 0.001 for three months, and p = 0.02 for six months) and ocular surface disease index (OSDI; p < 0.001 for one month and three months, and p = 0.006 for six months) were significantly worse in the FS-LASIK group than in the SMILE group at follow-up. At six months postoperatively, TBUT and TFO values in both the SMILE and FS-LASIK groups and OSDI scores in the SMILE group returned to preoperative levels, but SIT values in both groups (p = 0.02 for the SMILE group and p < 0.001 for the FS-LASIK group) and OSDI in the FS-LASIK group (p < 0.001) were still statistically impaired.

conclusionDry eye after both SMILE and FS-LASIK usually occurs transiently. SMILE does not show obvious superiority over FS-LASIK by exhibiting similar and acceptable objective parameters, and SMILE may have milder subjective symptoms.

Indexed as

Corneal Surgery, LaserDry Eye SyndromesHumansKeratomileusis, Laser In SituLasers, ExcimerMyopia

Identifiers

PMID27992482
PMCPMC5161410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.