Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995) · 2025
Efficacy of Correcting Different Types of Astigmatism With Small Incision Lenticule Extraction: A Prospective Contralateral Eye Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yu Manrong, Liu Yin, Jiang Wenshan, Huang Jia
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate axis-dependent visual and refractive outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in patients with interocular astigmatic axis discordance.
METHODS: Seventy-five patients (150 eyes) with interocular astigmatic axis discordance were included in the study. Based on interocular axis combinations, patients were stratified into three cohorts: with-the-rule (WTR)/against-the-rule (ATR) (n = 19), WTR/oblique astigmatism (OA) (n = 39), and ATR/OA (n = 17). Refractive outcomes, corneal topography, and corneal wavefront aberrations were analyzed preoperatively and at 1 and 6 months postoperatively. Vector analysis using the Alpins method compared astigmatic correction accuracy.
RESULTS: At 6 months, no significant difference was observed in visual acuity or residual sphere or cylinder between axis among different groups. Although 84% of ATR eyes and 64% of OA eyes achieved residual astigmatism of 0.25 diopters (D) or less, compared to 47% and 38% of their contralateral WTR eyes. Vector analysis revealed a systematic undercorrect of correction indices (CI < 1.0) in WTR eyes, and a full correction in non-WTR eyes (ATR CI = 0.99 ± 0.50, OA CI = 1.00 ± 0.47). ATR eyes exhibited greater angle of error compared to the contralateral WTR eyes (P = .04). OA eyes demonstrated decreased Trefoil30° aberrations compared to the contralateral ATR eyes (P = .003).
CONCLUSIONS: SMILE exhibited axis-specific efficacy patterns, with predictable astigmatic correction achieved in ATR and OA eyes, whereas WTR eyes demonstrated systematic undercorrection. These findings highlight the clinical relevance of preoperative axis evaluation, particularly in patients with interocular discordance.
METHODS: Seventy-five patients (150 eyes) with interocular astigmatic axis discordance were included in the study. Based on interocular axis combinations, patients were stratified into three cohorts: with-the-rule (WTR)/against-the-rule (ATR) (n = 19), WTR/oblique astigmatism (OA) (n = 39), and ATR/OA (n = 17). Refractive outcomes, corneal topography, and corneal wavefront aberrations were analyzed preoperatively and at 1 and 6 months postoperatively. Vector analysis using the Alpins method compared astigmatic correction accuracy.
RESULTS: At 6 months, no significant difference was observed in visual acuity or residual sphere or cylinder between axis among different groups. Although 84% of ATR eyes and 64% of OA eyes achieved residual astigmatism of 0.25 diopters (D) or less, compared to 47% and 38% of their contralateral WTR eyes. Vector analysis revealed a systematic undercorrect of correction indices (CI < 1.0) in WTR eyes, and a full correction in non-WTR eyes (ATR CI = 0.99 ± 0.50, OA CI = 1.00 ± 0.47). ATR eyes exhibited greater angle of error compared to the contralateral WTR eyes (P = .04). OA eyes demonstrated decreased Trefoil30° aberrations compared to the contralateral ATR eyes (P = .003).
CONCLUSIONS: SMILE exhibited axis-specific efficacy patterns, with predictable astigmatic correction achieved in ATR and OA eyes, whereas WTR eyes demonstrated systematic undercorrection. These findings highlight the clinical relevance of preoperative axis evaluation, particularly in patients with interocular discordance.