ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Myopic Lenticule Extraction with the Zeiss VisuMax 500 and 800 Systems.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of outcomes after SMILE using VISUMAX 800 and VISUMAX 500 for correcting myopia and myopic astigmatism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- 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
- Postoperative Contrast Sensitivity and Its Association with Lenticule Surface Regularity After KLEx with the VisuMax 800.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the visual outcomes, safety and efficacy of myopic keratorefractive lenticule extraction treatments using the newer Zeiss VisuMax 800 system over its precursor, the VisuMax 500 system. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review conducted at a private clinic in Western Australia of myopic keratorefractive lenticule extraction treatments with the VisuMax 500 and the VisuMax 800 systems between July 2021 and February 2023. Pre-operative and 1-month post-operative data were compared between the two cohorts. Demographics, best corrected visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, mean refractive spherical equivalent, total suction time and complications were recorded. Results: Fifty procedures for each system were identified. Eight eyes in the VisuMax 500 cohort (group 1) and five eyes in the VisuMax 800 cohort (group 2) were excluded due to non-attendance at the 1-month post-operative review. The average total suction time was 34 seconds vs 13 seconds respectively. A single case of suction loss occurred in group 1. The mean pre-operative mean refractive spherical equivalent of groups 1 and 2 were -6.02D (-3.63 to -9.00) and -5.56D (-2.75 to -8.88) (P = 0.20). The mean post-operative mean refractive spherical equivalent of the two groups were 0.08D (-1.00 to 1.25) and -0.03D (-2.25 to 1.00) (P = 0.31). Conclusion: The VisuMax 500 and 800 systems have similar visual outcomes and no significant difference in safety profiles. The main advantage of the newer VisuMax 800 femtosecond laser is its speed and potential for less cases of suction loss. Larger studies over longer terms are required.
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.