Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38951314›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2024

Three-Month Comprehensive Outcomes of Topography-Guided LASIK Versus Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction (KLEx): A Prospective Contralateral Study.

Kayvon A Moin, Garrett N Manion, Srujay Pandiri, Phillip C Hoopes, Majid Moshirfar

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05611294 (A Visual Outcome Comparison of Topography Guided LASIK Versus Small Incision Lenticule Extraction), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05611294 naunknown statusnot on this map

A Visual Outcome Comparison of Topography Guided LASIK Versus Small Incision Lenticule Extraction: A Prospective Contralateral Eye Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorHoopes VisionRan2022 to 2025Enrolled42ConditionsMyopia, AstigmatismArmsTopography Guided LASIK Surgery, Small Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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 · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kayvon A MoinHoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, 11820 S State St #200, Draper, UT, 84020, USA.
Garrett N ManionCreighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE, USA.
Srujay PandiriUniversity of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Phillip C HoopesHoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, 11820 S State St #200, Draper, UT, 84020, USA.
Majid MoshirfarHoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, 11820 S State St #200, Draper, UT, 84020, USA. cornea2020@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1024-6250

Funding

Alcon 69646481
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of this study was to compare outcomes of topography-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (TG-LASIK) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE®) for correcting myopia and myopic astigmatism.

methodsIn this prospective, randomized contralateral study, 34 patients (68 eyes) received TG-LASIK in one eye, and SMILE in their fellow eye. Efficacy, safety, predictability, higher-order aberrations, corneal tomography, biomechanics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed preoperatively and up to 3 months postoperatively.

resultsBoth platforms showed comparable efficacy at 3 months (TG-LASIK 1.08 ± 0.19; SMILE 0.98 ± 0.17, p = 0.055). However, TG-LASIK demonstrated quicker visual recovery, with 63% and 89% achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/16 or better at 1 day and 1 week, respectively, compared to SMILE (34% and 63%; p < 0.05). Safety index at 3 months did not significantly differ between TG-LASIK and SMILE (p = 0.223). TG-LASIK and SMILE had 44% and 56% of eyes within 0.13 D of spherical equivalent (SEQ) target, respectively. SMILE induced more total higher-order aberrations (HOAs), vertical coma, and oblique trefoil than TG-LASIK at 3 months (p < 0.05). Both platforms showed similar increases in epithelial remodeling, but SMILE induced thicker epithelium than TG-LASIK at the 7.0-mm nasal zonal area. No significant differences were found in corneal hysteresis (CH) or corneal resistance factor (CRF) at 3 months (p > 0.05). Reported symptoms of glare, halos, rings, starbursts, or dry eye did not significantly differ between groups at 3 months (p > 0.05). Overall, 59% of patients preferred their TG-LASIK treated eye at 1 month, but 65% of patients had no specific eye preference at 3 months.

conclusionTG-LASIK and SMILE demonstrate excellent and comparable efficacy, safety, and predictability at 3 months, but TG-LASIK offers faster postoperative visual recovery at 1 day and 1 week. TG-LASIK induces fewer HOAs than SMILE, but both procedures affect corneal biomechanics similarly.

trial registrationClincialTrials.gov identifier, NCT05611294.

Indexed as

ContouraEX500Higher-order aberrationsKLExLASIKReLEXSMILETopography-guidedVisuMaxWaveLight

Identifiers

PMID38951314
PMCPMC11246376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.