ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Ray-tracing guided versus topography-guided FS-LASIK for myopia: a comparative study of relative peripheral refraction and visual quality.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the distribution of relative peripheral refraction (RPR) and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) following ray-tracing-guided (RG) and topography-guided (TG) femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and to investigate their associations with postoperative visual symptoms.
methodsThis study compared the clinical outcomes of RG FS-LASIK and TG FS-LASIK, with 50 eyes from 50 patients prospectively enrolled in each group. Evaluations preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively included visual acuity, manifest refraction, HOAs, RPR, and the quality of vision questionnaire. RPR was assessed via wide-field peripheral refraction and analyzed across eccentricities (5°, 12.5°, 25°, and >25°) within the superior, inferior, nasal, and temporal quadrants.
resultsThe RG and TG groups showed comparable visual outcomes, with no significant differences in efficacy index (1.16 ± 0.22 vs. 1.14 ± 0.21, p = 0.755) and safety index (1.21 ± 0.22 vs. 1.24 ± 0.21, p = 0.816). Both platforms induced changes in HOAs and coma, whereas reduced spherical aberration was found in the RG group. Both procedures led to a reduction in RPR, a trend that became increasingly prominent in the peripheral region. However, the TG group showed relatively uniform RPR changes across the visual field, whereas the RG group exhibited a significant increase in superior-inferior RPR asymmetry after FS-LASIK. RPR was regionally associated with HOAs, with >25° RPR mainly correlated with spherical aberration (r = -0.458, p < 0.001) and HOAs (r = -0.265, p = 0.008), and superior-inferior asymmetry was negatively correlated with spherical aberration (r = -0.357, p = 0.001). Regression analysis indicated that superior RPR (coef = -0.601, p = 0.001) and superior-inferior (S - I) symmetry (coef = 0.652, p = 0.004) were significantly associated with glare, and a negative shift in spherical aberration (coef = 0.917, p = 0.007) was associated with fewer starburst symptoms.
conclusionBoth RG and TG FS-LASIK provide comparable central visual correction, but they exert distinct effects on RPR profiles and HOAs. Postoperative glare was associated with RPR asymmetry, whereas the negative spherical aberration appeared to alleviate starburst symptoms.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500106477), retrospectively registered on July 24, 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.