[Retreatment after keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) : Results of various methods and influence of the recommendations of the Committee for Refractive Surgery (KRC) on the incidence of retreatment].

Anika Förster, Ziad Muqbel, Samer Alkarkoukly, H Burkhard Dick, Suphi Taneri
{"title":"[Retreatment after keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) : Results of various methods and influence of the recommendations of the Committee for Refractive Surgery (KRC) on the incidence of retreatment].","authors":"Anika Förster, Ziad Muqbel, Samer Alkarkoukly, H Burkhard Dick, Suphi Taneri","doi":"10.1007/s00347-025-02239-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) has been shown to be safe and effective for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Residual refractive errors reduce the uncorrected postoperative visual acuity leading to patient dissatisfaction and increased retreatment rates.</p><p><strong>Aim of the study: </strong>The aim was to assess the potential influence of the recommendations of the Committee for Refractive Surgery (KRC) on the likelihood of retreatment and to compare the results of various methods for retreatment after KLEx for myopia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective study of eyes with myopia and myopic astigmatism in which KLEx (SMILE, Visumax 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) was performed between April 2015 and December 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2462 eyes from 1278 patients were analyzed. Of the eyes 3.05% (n = 75) were retreated within 24 months. Eyes in the recommended treatment range (corrections up to -8.0 dpt in the stronger main section) had a 50% lower risk of retreatment than eyes within the borderline range (corrections between -8.0 dpt and -10.0 dpt in the stronger main section). Retreatment was predominantly performed using the advanced surface ablation (ASA n = 44) or the Circle program (transformation of a SMILE cap into a flap, n = 29). The postoperative results of both methods after 3 months were comparably safe and effective; however, visual recovery was significantly faster with Circle. A second KLEx treatment in two eyes (one patient) resulted in a residual refractive error, which impaired the uncorrected visual acuity even 1.7 years later.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was a significantly lower retreatment rate in the recommended treatment range than in the borderline range according to the KRC recommendations. In addition, the ASA and Circle proved to be equally predictable but with different healing processes. These results can help with the education and selection of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":72808,"journal":{"name":"Die Ophthalmologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Die Ophthalmologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-025-02239-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) has been shown to be safe and effective for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Residual refractive errors reduce the uncorrected postoperative visual acuity leading to patient dissatisfaction and increased retreatment rates.

Aim of the study: The aim was to assess the potential influence of the recommendations of the Committee for Refractive Surgery (KRC) on the likelihood of retreatment and to compare the results of various methods for retreatment after KLEx for myopia.

Methods: Retrospective study of eyes with myopia and myopic astigmatism in which KLEx (SMILE, Visumax 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) was performed between April 2015 and December 2022.

Results: A total of 2462 eyes from 1278 patients were analyzed. Of the eyes 3.05% (n = 75) were retreated within 24 months. Eyes in the recommended treatment range (corrections up to -8.0 dpt in the stronger main section) had a 50% lower risk of retreatment than eyes within the borderline range (corrections between -8.0 dpt and -10.0 dpt in the stronger main section). Retreatment was predominantly performed using the advanced surface ablation (ASA n = 44) or the Circle program (transformation of a SMILE cap into a flap, n = 29). The postoperative results of both methods after 3 months were comparably safe and effective; however, visual recovery was significantly faster with Circle. A second KLEx treatment in two eyes (one patient) resulted in a residual refractive error, which impaired the uncorrected visual acuity even 1.7 years later.

Conclusion: There was a significantly lower retreatment rate in the recommended treatment range than in the borderline range according to the KRC recommendations. In addition, the ASA and Circle proved to be equally predictable but with different healing processes. These results can help with the education and selection of patients.

【角膜屈光性晶状体摘除(KLEx)后的再治疗:各种方法的结果及屈光外科委员会(KRC)建议对再治疗发生率的影响】。
背景:角膜屈光性晶状体摘除(KLEx)是一种安全有效的矫正近视和近视散光的方法。残余屈光不正减少了术后未矫正的视力,导致患者不满意,增加了复诊率。研究目的:目的是评估屈光手术委员会(KRC)的建议对再治疗可能性的潜在影响,并比较近视KLEx术后各种再治疗方法的结果。方法:对2015年4月至2022年12月在德国耶拿行KLEx (SMILE, Visumax 500, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena)眼科检查的近视和近视散光患者进行回顾性研究。结果:共分析1278例患者2462只眼。3.05% (n = 75)眼在24个月内痊愈。在推荐治疗范围内的眼睛(在强主区矫正至-8.0 dpt)再治疗的风险比在边缘范围内的眼睛(在强主区矫正至-8.0 dpt至-10.0 dpt)低50%。再治疗主要采用高级表面消融(ASA n = 44)或Circle程序(SMILE帽转化为皮瓣,n = 29)。术后3个月两种方法均比较安全有效;然而,Circle的视力恢复速度明显更快。在2只眼睛(1名患者)的第二次KLEx治疗导致残余屈光不正,甚至在1.7年后仍对未矫正的视力造成损害。结论:KRC推荐治疗范围内的再治疗率明显低于边缘治疗范围内的再治疗率。此外,ASA和Circle被证明是同样可预测的,但具有不同的愈合过程。这些结果可以帮助教育和选择患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信