ArticleInternational ophthalmology2022
SMILE after DALK to reduce residual refraction: two-year results.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Femtosecond-laser-assisted Small Incision Lenticule Extraction to Treat Refractive Error: A Narrative Review.Middle East African journal of ophthalmologyReview
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the two-year results of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correcting post-keratoplasty myopia and myopic astigmatism.
methodsIn this case-series study, 10 eyes of 10 patients with a 6- to 10-year history of successful deep lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) underwent SMILE using the VisuMax laser platform. Ophthalmologic examinations and visual acuity and refraction measurement were taken pre- and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The Pentacam and Sirius imaging were done in the first and last follow-up sessions.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 39.60 ± 7.86 years. Six subjects were male. Two years after SMILE, the mean improvement in UDVA and CDVA was 3.60 ± 1.84 (P < 0.001) and 1.60 ± 2.91 (P = 0.231) LogMAR, respectively. The mean decrease in spherical equivalent, spherical error, and cylinder power was 1.92 ± 1.96 diopter (D) (P = 0.013), 0.70 ± 3.05D (P = 0.213), and 2.42 ± 2.91D (P = 0.024), respectively. The vector mean target-induced astigmatism, surgical-induced astigmatism, and difference vector were 1.30D@44˚, 1.11D@24˚, and 0.86D@73˚, respectively. Two years after SMILE, vertical coma, horizontal coma, and spherical aberration increased by 0.44 ± 0.51, 0.23 ± 0.32, and 0.02 ± 0.16 µm, respectively, (all P > 0.05) while trefoil reduced by 0.29 ± 0.75 µm (P = 0.428).
conclusionSMILE can be an effective procedure for reducing refraction and astigmatism after DALK in patients with moderate myopia and moderate to severe astigmatism and improves the visual acuity in these patients. Axis rotation during surgery may result in under-correction of astigmatism. Refinement of SMILE treatment nomogram for post-DALK cases seems necessary.
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.