ArticlePloS one2021
Refractive results with SMILE using lower energy settings in the United States.
Article in PloS one, 2021. 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.
- Femtosecond Laser Direct Writing of Diffraction Gratings for Modifying the Refractive Index of Intraocular Lenses.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Visual outcomes for the initial 500 eyes treated with keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) for myopia and myopic astigmatism at a single-site.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2025Article
- One-Year Visual Outcomes and Corneal Higher-Order Aberration Assessment of Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Treatment of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report the visual and refractive results of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with low energy settings in the United States (US) and to evaluate outcomes for low astigmatism treatment.
settingPrivate clinical practice.
designRetrospective cohort study.
methodsThis study retrospectively reviewed 462 consecutive eyes that underwent SMILE with lower energy settings. Inclusion criteria included all patients between the ages of 19-39 with myopic astigmatism up to -11.25 diopters (D) spherical equivalent (sphere up to -10.00 D, astigmatism up to -3.00 D), and corrected distance visual acuity of at least 20/25. Eyes with low astigmatism (0.25 D-0.50 D) were also included. Outcome analysis was performed according to the Standard Graphs for Reporting Refractive Surgery at postoperative month (POM) 1, and POM 3-6 when data were available.
resultsThe mean preoperative spherical equivalent treated was -4.96 ± 2.07; at POM 1, 92% of eyes achieved uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better and maintained visual stability throughout the remainder of the study. At last visit, 431 eyes (93%) achieved UCVA of 20/20 or better, and 461 eyes (99.8%) were 20/25 or better. Ninety-seven (21%) eyes gained at least 1 Snellen line of corrected distance visual acuity and no eyes lost 2 or more lines. Almost all eyes (n = 453, 98%) were within 0.5D of target; 85% of eyes with low astigmatism had ≤0.25 D at last visit compared to 80% of eyes with moderate astigmatism.
conclusionsSMILE with U.S.-approved low energy settings is safe, predictable, and efficacious and provides patients with a fast visual recovery.
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.