Journal francais d'ophtalmologie · 2024
Clinical outcomes of SMILE and WFG-LASIK used to treat myopia and astigmatism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание 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.
Wei C, Liu J, Zhang C, Liu J Y, Lu Y M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy and postoperative visual quality of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and Wavefront-Guided Laser in situ keratomileusis (WFG-LASIK) and to analyze their efficacy in correcting astigmatism.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. RevMan software version 5.3.0 was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 976 eyes were included in 8 studies, of which 539 eyes underwent SMILE and 437 eyes underwent WFG-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better (P=0.18), the proportion of eyes within±0.50 diopter of target refraction postoperatively (P=0.10), or the postoperative magnitude of cylinder (P=0.10). Regarding the Alpins vector analysis of astigmatism, there was no statistically significant difference in the surgical magnitude of error (P=0.09) between the two groups. WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error (P= 0.002) and higher surgical correction index of cylinder (P=0.03) than SMILE. In terms of aberrations, higher order aberrations (P=0.46), spherical aberrations (P=0.22) and trefoil (P=0.56) were not statistically different, while WFG-LASIK induced less coma than SMILE surgery (P=0.02).
CONCLUSION: Both SMILE and WFG-LASIK are safe and effective ways to correct myopia and astigmatism. Compared with SMILE, WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error, higher surgical correction index of cylinder and induces less coma.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. RevMan software version 5.3.0 was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 976 eyes were included in 8 studies, of which 539 eyes underwent SMILE and 437 eyes underwent WFG-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of eyes achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better (P=0.18), the proportion of eyes within±0.50 diopter of target refraction postoperatively (P=0.10), or the postoperative magnitude of cylinder (P=0.10). Regarding the Alpins vector analysis of astigmatism, there was no statistically significant difference in the surgical magnitude of error (P=0.09) between the two groups. WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error (P= 0.002) and higher surgical correction index of cylinder (P=0.03) than SMILE. In terms of aberrations, higher order aberrations (P=0.46), spherical aberrations (P=0.22) and trefoil (P=0.56) were not statistically different, while WFG-LASIK induced less coma than SMILE surgery (P=0.02).
CONCLUSION: Both SMILE and WFG-LASIK are safe and effective ways to correct myopia and astigmatism. Compared with SMILE, WFG-LASIK has a lower surgical angle of error, higher surgical correction index of cylinder and induces less coma.