ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2026
Initial Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Ray-Tracing-Guided LASIK (Wavelight Plus) Versus KLEx (SMILE Pro).
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study evaluates visual and refractive outcomes of our initial experience using ray-tracing-guided Wavelight Plus (WLP) LASIK and SMILE Pro KLEx carried out by one surgeon at a single center.
methodsA retrospective, non-randomized study was conducted at one refractive surgery center. Patients undergoing WLP or SMILE Pro with at least 1 month of postoperative follow-up were included. Outcomes were assessed at 1 and 3 months and included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), safety and efficacy indices, and vector analysis of astigmatism. Additionally, a comparison with wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK, an established procedure with a well-refined nomogram at the study center, was provided as an internal benchmark.
resultsA total of 160 eyes from 93 patients were analyzed, including 50 eyes treated with WLP, 55 with SMILE Pro, and 55 with WFO. WLP demonstrated significantly better UDVA than SMILE Pro at both 1 month (p < 0.001) and 3 months (p = 0.033) and was more likely to achieve a UDVA of 20/20. Residual astigmatism was significantly lower in the WLP group than in both the WFO and SMILE Pro groups at 1 and 3 months (all p < 0.001). Vector analysis showed a correction index of 1.13 for SMILE Pro, 1.11 for WFO, and 1.08 for WLP at 3 months.
conclusionsIn our initial experience with the WLP and SMILE Pro platforms, WLP achieved better UDVA and more precise astigmatic correction compared with SMILE Pro. Additionally, WLP, without the use of a nomogram, had comparable safety and efficacy outcomes to WFO. Based on our initial experience at one center, astigmatic correction appears to be a limiting factor for KLEx platforms in achieving outcomes similar to modern LASIK platforms.
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.