0.05D 精确屈光间隔对小切口扁桃体摘除手术的影响:短期随访的回顾性研究。

IF 1.4 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Clinical Optometry Pub Date : 2024-12-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OPTO.S485270
Jiaxi Li, Jing Zhen, Ke Xie, Kaihua Yao, Ziyuan Liu, Xuemin Li
{"title":"0.05D 精确屈光间隔对小切口扁桃体摘除手术的影响:短期随访的回顾性研究。","authors":"Jiaxi Li, Jing Zhen, Ke Xie, Kaihua Yao, Ziyuan Liu, Xuemin Li","doi":"10.2147/OPTO.S485270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the postoperative visual quality of patients undergoing small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with spherical trial lens intervals of 0.05D and 0.25D in preoperative manifest refraction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 196 eyes of 101 patients with 0.05D intervals to perform manifest refraction and 194 eyes of 98 patients with 0.25D intervals. Intraoperative lenticule thickness was compared in patients with different myopic grades. Postoperative examinations, including uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and manifest refraction results, were compared at 1-day, 1-week and 1-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the one-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in UDVA and spherical equivalent (SE) between the two groups (<i>P</i>=0.602 and 0.898, respectively). But the proportion of patients with a UDVA of more than 0.0 one month postoperatively was higher in the 0.05D intervals group (<i>P</i>=0.067). In patients with moderate myopia, the corneas with 0.05D interval manifest refraction had thinner maximum lenticule thickness compared with those in the control group (<i>P</i>=0.019).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with the 0.25D interval group, patients performed manifest refraction with 0.05D spherical lens interval obtained equally good postoperative visual quality. The moderate myopia patients in the 0.05D interval group had thinner cornea cut during SMILE.</p>","PeriodicalId":43701,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Optometry","volume":"16 ","pages":"341-348"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11682664/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of 0.05D Interval Precise Refraction on Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery: A Retrospective Study with Short-Term Follow-Up.\",\"authors\":\"Jiaxi Li, Jing Zhen, Ke Xie, Kaihua Yao, Ziyuan Liu, Xuemin Li\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/OPTO.S485270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the postoperative visual quality of patients undergoing small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with spherical trial lens intervals of 0.05D and 0.25D in preoperative manifest refraction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 196 eyes of 101 patients with 0.05D intervals to perform manifest refraction and 194 eyes of 98 patients with 0.25D intervals. Intraoperative lenticule thickness was compared in patients with different myopic grades. Postoperative examinations, including uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and manifest refraction results, were compared at 1-day, 1-week and 1-month follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the one-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in UDVA and spherical equivalent (SE) between the two groups (<i>P</i>=0.602 and 0.898, respectively). But the proportion of patients with a UDVA of more than 0.0 one month postoperatively was higher in the 0.05D intervals group (<i>P</i>=0.067). In patients with moderate myopia, the corneas with 0.05D interval manifest refraction had thinner maximum lenticule thickness compared with those in the control group (<i>P</i>=0.019).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with the 0.25D interval group, patients performed manifest refraction with 0.05D spherical lens interval obtained equally good postoperative visual quality. The moderate myopia patients in the 0.05D interval group had thinner cornea cut during SMILE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Optometry\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"341-348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11682664/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Optometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S485270\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Optometry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S485270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:比较小切口晶状体摘出术(SMILE)患者术前明显屈光度与球晶状体间隔0.05D和0.25D患者术后视力质量的差异。方法:选取101例196眼0.05D间隔进行明显屈光,98例194眼0.25D间隔进行明显屈光。比较不同程度近视患者术中晶状体厚度。术后随访1天、1周和1个月,比较未矫正距离视力(UDVA)和明显屈光结果。结果:随访1个月时,两组UDVA和球形当量(SE)比较差异无统计学意义(P值分别为0.602和0.898)。但术后1个月UDVA大于0.0的患者比例在0.05D间隔组较高(P=0.067)。中度近视患者明显屈光间隔为0.05D的角膜最大晶状体厚度较对照组薄(P=0.019)。结论:与0.25D晶状体间距组相比,0.05D晶状体间距明显屈光的患者术后视力质量同样良好。0.05D间隔组中度近视患者SMILE时角膜切口较薄。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of 0.05D Interval Precise Refraction on Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery: A Retrospective Study with Short-Term Follow-Up.

Background: To compare the postoperative visual quality of patients undergoing small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with spherical trial lens intervals of 0.05D and 0.25D in preoperative manifest refraction.

Methods: The study included 196 eyes of 101 patients with 0.05D intervals to perform manifest refraction and 194 eyes of 98 patients with 0.25D intervals. Intraoperative lenticule thickness was compared in patients with different myopic grades. Postoperative examinations, including uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and manifest refraction results, were compared at 1-day, 1-week and 1-month follow-up.

Results: At the one-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in UDVA and spherical equivalent (SE) between the two groups (P=0.602 and 0.898, respectively). But the proportion of patients with a UDVA of more than 0.0 one month postoperatively was higher in the 0.05D intervals group (P=0.067). In patients with moderate myopia, the corneas with 0.05D interval manifest refraction had thinner maximum lenticule thickness compared with those in the control group (P=0.019).

Conclusion: Compared with the 0.25D interval group, patients performed manifest refraction with 0.05D spherical lens interval obtained equally good postoperative visual quality. The moderate myopia patients in the 0.05D interval group had thinner cornea cut during SMILE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Optometry
Clinical Optometry OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Optometry is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on clinical optometry. All aspects of patient care are addressed within the journal as well as the practice of optometry including economic and business analyses. Basic and clinical research papers are published that cover all aspects of optics, refraction and its application to the theory and practice of optometry. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Theoretical and applied optics, Delivery of patient care in optometry practice, Refraction and correction of errors, Screening and preventative aspects of eye disease, Extended clinical roles for optometrists including shared care and provision of medications, Teaching and training optometrists, International aspects of optometry, Business practice, Patient adherence, quality of life, satisfaction, Health economic evaluations.
×
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