ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Comparison of Refractive Outcomes in Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Performed with One or Two Incisions.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo retrospectively compare the refractive outcomes between two groups of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), one with a single incision and the second one with dual-incisions.
settingEbsar Eye Center, Benha, Qalyopia, Egypt.
designA retrospective cohort study.
methodsThis study was made up of two groups (162 eyes each): all eyes in group 1 had one SMILE cut at 120°, and all eyes in group 2 had double SMILE incisions, the first incision at 120° and the second one at 270°. Refractive outcomes between the two groups were compared at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
resultsThe mean preoperative refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) was -5.75 ± 2.59 D and -6.38 ± 2.18 D in group 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.73), and a cylinder of 1.25 ± 0.83 D and 0.75 ± 0.81 D, respectively (P = 0.85). At 12 months postoperatively, in group 1, 162 eyes (100%) achieved a UCVA of 20/25, 154 eyes (95.06%) achieved a UCVA of 20/20, and 110 eyes (67.90%) achieved 20/16. In group 2, 162 eyes (100%) achieved a UCVA of 20/25, 156 eyes (96.29%) achieved a UCVA of 20/20, and 113 eyes (69.75%) achieved 20/16. The mean MRSE at 12 months postoperatively was -0.25 ± 0.33 D in group 1 and -0.5 ± 0.33 D in group 2 (P = 0.62).
conclusionDual-incision SMILE is safe and effective as single-incision SMILE, with a predictable and stable effect in correcting 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.