ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2026
Comparing Efficacy and Corneal Biomechanics Between KLEx and KLEx Xtra in High Myopia: A 1-Year Prospective Randomized Study.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06992011 (A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Clinical Effectiveness of SMILE Versus SMILE Xtra in Myopia), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Clinical Effectiveness of SMILE Versus SMILE Xtra in Myopia
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis work aims to compare the 12-month changes in refractive outcomes, safety, efficacy, predictability, corneal biomechanics, and corneal topography between keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) and KLEx combined with prophylactic corneal collagen cross-linking (KLEx Xtra).
methodsA prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted with 80 eyes in each group. The primary endpoint was the manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) at 12 months postoperatively in both groups. Secondary endpoints included visual outcomes, corneal biomechanical parameters, and topographic changes. The study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT06992011).
resultsAt the 12-month follow-up, a small statistically significant difference in MRSE was observed between the two groups (KLEx Xtra: - 0.02 ± 0.38 D and - 0.17 ± 0.35 D, p = 0.047). Both groups demonstrated comparable and favorable safety and efficacy indices at 12 months. While corneal haze occurred universally early after the CXL procedure, it persisted in a subset of eyes for up to 6 months. At 12 months postoperatively, both KLEx and KLEx Xtra groups showed significant changes in corneal biomechanical parameters. The KLEx Xtra group exhibited enhanced biomechanical strength, with a significant improvement in parameters such as first applanation velocity (A1 V), Corvis biomechanical index (CBI), stiffness parameter at applanation 1 (SP-A1), and stress-strain index (SSI), compared to the KLEx group at 12 months postoperatively (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in corneal topographic parameters up to 6 months postoperatively, but at 12 months, the KLEx group showed significantly higher steep K value of anterior corneal surface (K2 F) compared to the KLEx Xtra group.
conclusionsKLEx Xtra demonstrates superior refractive accuracy with a reduced risk of myopic regression within 12 months of follow-up while also enhancing corneal biomechanical strength, making it a viable alternative for people with high myopia.
trial registrationThe study has been registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06992011 (retrospectively registered at May 7, 2025).
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.