ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
Comparative visual outcomes of the first versus second eye following small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. 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 Affecting Visual Outcome after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) Pro.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2025Article
- Evaluation of corneal asymmetry and higher-order aberrations after small incision lenticule extraction for moderate and high myopia.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Comparison of early visual outcomes after SMILE using VISUMAX 800 and VISUMAX 500 for myopia: a retrospective matched case-control study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the visual outcomes of the first operated eyes with those of the second operated eyes following small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).
methodsA total of 202 patients (404 eyes) underwent SMILE using the tear film mark centration method for myopia and myopic astigmatism correction. Baseline characteristics, objective optical quality, decentered displacement, induced corneal aberrations, and modulation transfer function (MTF) values were assessed. Linear regression analyzed the relationship between decentration and visual quality parameters, including corneal aberrations and MTF values.
resultsNo significant difference was observed in objective visual quality, efficacy, and safety indexes between the two groups (all P > 0.05). The average decentered displacement for the first and second surgical eyes was 0.278 ± 0.17 mm and 0.315 ± 0.15 mm, respectively (P = 0.002). The horizontal coma in the first surgical eyes were notably lower than in the second (P = 0.000). MTF values at spatial frequencies of 5, 10, 15, and 20 cycles/degree (c/d) were higher in the first surgical eyes compared to the second (all P < 0.05). Linear regression indicated that high-order aberrations (HOAs), root mean square (RMS) coma, spherical aberration, horizontal coma, vertical coma, and eccentric displacement were all linearly correlated. Furthermore, MTF values exhibited a linear relationship with eccentric displacement across these spatial frequencies.
conclusionsThere was no discernible difference in visual acuity, efficacy, or safety between the two operated eyes. Nonetheless, the first operated eyes exhibited reduced decentered displacement and demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of horizontal coma and MTF values compared to the second operated eyes following SMILE. The variations in visual quality parameters were linearly correlated with decentered displacement.
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.