Rose K Sia,Isabel Eaddy,Hind Beydoun,Jennifer B Eaddy,Alexis Hogan,Zachary P Skurski
{"title":"Low Contrast Acuity Outcomes After SMILE and LASIK.","authors":"Rose K Sia,Isabel Eaddy,Hind Beydoun,Jennifer B Eaddy,Alexis Hogan,Zachary P Skurski","doi":"10.3928/1081597x-20240723-04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\r\nTo compare early visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) versus laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in terms of low contrast acuity.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA secondary analysis was performed using a harmonized dataset derived from two completed prospective cohort studies on active-duty military service members undergoing either SMILE (n = 37), wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK (n = 51), or wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK (n = 56). Night vision and photopic and mesopic low contrast visual acuity (LCVA) up to 3 months postoperatively were compared between groups.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nCompared to SMILE-treated eyes, WFG LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better night vision and photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .016; beta = -0.043, P = .007, respectively). WFO LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .012) but had worse mesopic LCVA at 3 months postoperatively (beta = 0.033, P = .015) versus SMILE-treated eyes.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nSMILE and LASIK, on either a WFG or WFO laser platform, yielded excellent outcomes, but LCVA seemed to recover quicker following LASIK compared to SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(9):e667-e671.].","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"30 1","pages":"e667-e671"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597x-20240723-04","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PURPOSE
To compare early visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) versus laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in terms of low contrast acuity.
METHODS
A secondary analysis was performed using a harmonized dataset derived from two completed prospective cohort studies on active-duty military service members undergoing either SMILE (n = 37), wavefront-guided (WFG) LASIK (n = 51), or wavefront-optimized (WFO) LASIK (n = 56). Night vision and photopic and mesopic low contrast visual acuity (LCVA) up to 3 months postoperatively were compared between groups.
RESULTS
Compared to SMILE-treated eyes, WFG LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better night vision and photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .016; beta = -0.043, P = .007, respectively). WFO LASIK-treated eyes had significantly better photopic LCVA at 1 month postoperatively (beta = -0.039, P = .012) but had worse mesopic LCVA at 3 months postoperatively (beta = 0.033, P = .015) versus SMILE-treated eyes.
CONCLUSIONS
SMILE and LASIK, on either a WFG or WFO laser platform, yielded excellent outcomes, but LCVA seemed to recover quicker following LASIK compared to SMILE. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(9):e667-e671.].
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Refractive Surgery, the official journal of the International Society of Refractive Surgery, a partner of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, has been a monthly peer-reviewed forum for original research, review, and evaluation of refractive and lens-based surgical procedures for more than 30 years. Practical, clinically valuable articles provide readers with the most up-to-date information regarding advances in the field of refractive surgery. Begin to explore the Journal and all of its great benefits such as:
• Columns including “Translational Science,” “Surgical Techniques,” and “Biomechanics”
• Supplemental videos and materials available for many articles
• Access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content
• Articles posted online just 2 months after acceptance.