Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2019
[Comparison of Long-term Results with Small Incision Refractive Lenticule Extraction (ReLEX SMILE) vs. Femto-LASIK].
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.
Breyer Detlev R H, Beckers Lena, Hagen Philipp, Kaymak Hakan, Klabe Karsten, Auffarth Gerd Uwe, Kretz Florian Tobias Alwin
Аннотация
AIM: Our aim was to retrospectively compare ReLEx Smile to femtosecondlaser-assisted LASIK (FsLASIK, femto-LASIK) in terms of safety, efficacy, stability as well as intraoperative complications. Comparable studies only show the results over the course of 3 years, making our data the first to examine longer term results.
MATERIALS/METHODS: To accomplish this, we compared 404 eyes after FsLASIK (Mel 80, Carl Zeiss Meditec) and 1192 eyes after ReLEx SMILE (VisuMax, Carl Zeiss Meditec). We collected patients' data at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after refractive surgery.
RESULTS: Five years postoperatively, the 2 methods showed equally good results in all investigated parameters. Over the course of these 5 years, the ReLEx SMILE achieved significantly better results for safety (p < 0.05) after 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. The results for visual acuity were significantly better for ReLEx SMILE after 1, 2 and 3 years. The predictability of both methods was consistently good over the entire period of time and intraoperative complications were equally low.
CONCLUSION: After retrospective analysis of the visual outcomes of our patients up to 5 years after surgery, the ReLEx SMILE method turned out to be at least as safe and efficient as the FsLASIK. The stability of the refractive outcome was equally good with the 2 methods. Due to the high level of satisfaction experienced by the patients, high patient comfort intra- and postoperatively, absence of dry eyes, and the absence of flap complications, ReLEx SMILE has replaced the FsLASIK in our daily practice and become our method of choice for corneal refractive surgery when it comes to the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.
MATERIALS/METHODS: To accomplish this, we compared 404 eyes after FsLASIK (Mel 80, Carl Zeiss Meditec) and 1192 eyes after ReLEx SMILE (VisuMax, Carl Zeiss Meditec). We collected patients' data at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after refractive surgery.
RESULTS: Five years postoperatively, the 2 methods showed equally good results in all investigated parameters. Over the course of these 5 years, the ReLEx SMILE achieved significantly better results for safety (p < 0.05) after 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. The results for visual acuity were significantly better for ReLEx SMILE after 1, 2 and 3 years. The predictability of both methods was consistently good over the entire period of time and intraoperative complications were equally low.
CONCLUSION: After retrospective analysis of the visual outcomes of our patients up to 5 years after surgery, the ReLEx SMILE method turned out to be at least as safe and efficient as the FsLASIK. The stability of the refractive outcome was equally good with the 2 methods. Due to the high level of satisfaction experienced by the patients, high patient comfort intra- and postoperatively, absence of dry eyes, and the absence of flap complications, ReLEx SMILE has replaced the FsLASIK in our daily practice and become our method of choice for corneal refractive surgery when it comes to the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.