SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2021
Implantable collamer lens versus small incision lenticule extraction for high myopia correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Higher order aberrations and visual quality after refractive surgeries for myopia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Changes in higher-order aberrations: toric implantable collamer lens implantation versus ICL combined with limbal relaxing incision.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Characteristics of biological parameters and implantable collamer lens (ICL) size selection in moderate, high, and super-high myopia eyes.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Subjective and objective changes in visual quality after implantable collamer lens implantation for myopia.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Bibliometric and visualized analysis of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens research between 2003 and 2023.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Exploring the Research Landscape of High Myopia: Trends, Contributors, and Key Areas of Focus.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Quality of vision after myopic refractive surgeries: SMILE, FS-LASIK, and ICL.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Postoperative efficacy, safety, predictability, and visual quality of implantable collamer lens implantation versus small incision lenticule extraction in myopic eyes: a Meta-analysis.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Safety and Effectiveness of Smooth Incision Lenticular Keratomileusis (SILKClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Long-Term Observation of Higher-Order Aberrations and Microdistortions in Bowman's Layer After Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correcting Myopia With Spherical Equivalent Higher Than -9.0 Diopters.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Early postoperative changes in corneal densitometry after SMILE with 120-μm and 130-μm cap thickness: a comparative study.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy, safety, predictability and visual quality between implantable collamer lens (ICL) implantation and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for high myopia correction in adults.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. A comprehensive literature search was done based on databases including PubMed, Science Direct, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The efficacy index, safety index, changes in Snellen lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), predictability (difference between post-operative and attempted spherical equivalent error, SER), incidence of halos, and change in higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were compared. Mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to estimate continuous outcomes, risk ratio (RR) and 95%CI was used to estimate categorical outcomes.
resultsFive observational studies involving 555 eyes were included in this review. Studies' sample sizes (eyes) ranged from 76 to 197. Subjects' refraction ranged from -6 diopter (D) to -12D. Study duration of most researches were 6 months or 12 months. Compared to SMILE, ICL implantation showed better efficacy index (MD=0.09, 95%CI:0.01 to 0.16) and better safety index (MD=0.08, 95%CI: 0.00 to 0.16). Compared with SMILE, more ICL-treated eyes gained one or more Snellen lines of CDVA (RR=1.54, 95%CI:1.28 to 1.86), more gained two or more lines (RR=2.09, 95%CI:1.40 to 3.13), less lost one or more lines (RR=0.17, 95%CI:0.05 to 0.63). There was no difference in predictability between two treatments, RRs of predictability of within ±0.5D and ±1D were 1.13 (95%CI: 0.94 to 1.36) and 1.00 (95%CI: 0.98 to 1.02). Compared with SMILE, ICL implantation came with a higher risk of halos [RR=1.79, 95%CI: 1.48 to 2.16] and less increase in total HOAs (MD=-0.23, 95%CI: -0.42 to -0.03).
conclusionCompared with SMILE, ICL implantation showed a higher risk of halos, but equal performance on SER control, and better performance on efficacy index, safety index, CDVA improvement and HOAs control. Overall, ICL implantation might be a better choice for high myopia correction in adults.
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.