Back to Search Start Over

A 3-month comparison study of subjective and objective visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in patients with low and moderate myopia.

Authors :
Wang LX
Wang XL
Tang J
Ma K
Yin HB
Deng YP
Source :
International journal of ophthalmology [Int J Ophthalmol] 2023 Apr 18; Vol. 16 (4), pp. 608-615. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Apr 18 (Print Publication: 2023).
Publication Year :
2023

Abstract

Aim: To compare the subjective and objective visual quality between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) in patients with low and moderate myopia.<br />Methods: Patients undertaking SMILE or tPRK for the correction of low and moderate myopia were consecutively recruited in this prospective cohort study with a 3-month follow-up period. Objective evaluation [visual acuity test, manifest refraction, wavefront aberrations, the total cut-off value of the total modulation transfer function (MTF <subscript>cut-off</subscript> ), and Strehl ratio (SR)] and subjective evaluation of visual quality (quality-of-life questionnaire) were conducted before surgery and at days 1, 7, 30, and 90 after surgery.<br />Results: A total of 47 patients (94 eyes) with SMILE and 22 patients (22 eyes) with tPRK were enrolled. The uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was better in SMILE patients on day 7 after surgery (1.13±0.13 vs 0.99±0.17, t =4.85, P <0.001) but was comparable at days 30 and 90. At day 90, the SMILE group had a lower spherical equivalent (SE) than the tPRK group (0.04±0.31 vs 0.19±0.43, t =2.08, P =0.042). Total higher order aberrations (HOAs) were induced in both surgical types, which were more evident in the tPRK group with 3-mm pupil diameter (0.16±0.07 vs 0.11±0.05, t =4.27, P <0.001) and 5-mm pupil diameter (0.39±0.17 vs 0.36±0.11, t =2.33, P =0.022). The MTF <subscript>cut-off</subscript> and SR showed a trend of improvement in both SMILE and tPRK patients but were statistically better in the SMILE group with both pupil diameters. There was a significant improvement of contrast sensitivity (CS) over baseline levels at the spatial frequency of 18 cycles/degree (c/d) in the SMILE group ( F =2.72, P =0.033) and at 3 c/d ( F =3.03, P =0.031), 12 c/d ( F =3.72, P =0.013), and 18 c/d ( F =4.62, P =0.004) in the tPRK group. The subjective quality of life questionnaire showed a steady improvement in the SMILE group ( F =8.31, P <0.001) but not the tPRK group.<br />Conclusion: SMILE and tPRK are both safe and effective ways to correct low and moderate myopia. A generally better and quicker recovery of visual quality favors the application of SMILE in qualified patients.<br /> (International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2222-3959
Volume :
16
Issue :
4
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
International journal of ophthalmology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
37077486
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2023.04.15