ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of clinical outcomes following small incision lenticule extraction performed with the visumax 800 versus visumax 500 femtosecond laser.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Initial Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Ray-Tracing-Guided LASIK (Wavelight Plus) Versus KLEx (SMILE Pro).Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Flap Optimization Using VISUMAX 800 Femtosecond Laser for Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of VISUMAX 800 and VISUMAX 500 Femtosecond Laser Systems for Myopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Clinical outcomes of the new generation VISUMAX 800 platform in small incision lenticule extraction for Myopia in Chinese patients.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Management of sliding suction loss during keratorefractive lenticule extraction performed with VisuMax 800 femtosecond laser using CIRCLE software: a case report.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Intraoperative Safety and Postoperative Complications After SMILE Pro: A Retrospective Case Series of 916 Eyes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Early Clinical Outcome of Hyperopic Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) Using the VisuMax 800 in South Korea: A Pilot Study.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2026Article
- Comparison of early clinical and optical quality-related outcomes after SMILE using VisuMax 800 versus VisuMax 500 for myopia and low-to-moderate astigmatism in a Chinese population: a single-center retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Association of Treatment Decentration with Early Outcomes Following SMILE Pro: A Secondary Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Vector outcomes after SMILE pro with the VISUMAX 800 for high versus moderate-to-low astigmatism: a contralateral eye comparison.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared clinical outcomes between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedures performed with the Visumax 800 and Visumax 500 femtosecond lasers. We compared the clinical outcomes of 100 eyes of 50 patients who underwent SMILE using the Visumax 800 (SMILE Pro group) and 100 eyes of 50 patients who underwent SMILE using the Visumax 500 femtosecond laser (SMILE group). Outcomes were assessed at a 3-month follow-up, including standard visual outcomes, optic zone decentration, and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs). The mean lenticule creation time was significantly shorter in the SMILE Pro group (10.33 ± 0.82 s) than the SMILE group (28.27 ± 2.34 s, P < 0.001). At 3 months postoperatively, the groups had no significant differences in uncorrected or corrected distance visual acuity, residual refractive errors, or corneal HOAs. However, the optic zone decentration was significantly smaller in the SMILE Pro group than in the SMILE group (P < 0.001), and the vertical coma induction was significantly lower in the SMILE Pro group compared with the SMILE group (P = 0.034), suggesting that the Visumax 800 provides enhanced centration accuracy, reduced vertical coma induction, and faster lenticule creation, demonstrating comparable efficacy, safety, and predictability to the Visumax 500.
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.