ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction with Dual-Incisions in Myopic Patients.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Influencing Astigmatic Correction Using Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Refractive Outcomes in Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Performed with One or Two Incisions.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Ocular Residual Astigmatism in Eyes with Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism and Its Interaction with Other Forms of Astigmatism.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the stability, safety, predictability, and efficacy of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with dual-incisions in myopic patients.
settingEbsar Eye center, Benha, Qalyopia, Egypt.
designSingle-center, retrospective, COHORT study. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe study was conducted as a retrospective non-comparative analysis of the records of 105 eyes of 53 patients treated by the SMILE with a dual-incisions technique for a mean spherical myopic error of -5.05 ± 1.93 D (range: -1.38 to -9.0 D) with or without astigmatism and the mean astigmatism of -0.90 ± 0.83 D. The mean LogMAR corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was -0.04 ± 0.07.
resultsOne month after surgery, the mean refractive error was -0.03 ± 0.56 D (range: 0.88 to -1.50 D), and the mean postoperative astigmatism was 0.20 ± 0.31 D. The mean LogMAR UDVA was 0.07 ± 0.18 in the last follow-up visit, 12 months after surgery. At the end of the follow-up period, approximately 91.43% of patients had unchanged CDVA or gained one or more lines, 8.57% lost one line of CDVA, and 0.0% lost 2 lines.
conclusionSMILE with dual-incisions is effective and safe, with a stable and predictable outcome for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.