Comparison of the posterior corneal elevation and biomechanics after SMILE and LASEK for myopia: a short- and long-term observation.
Adolescent
Adult
Biomechanical Phenomena
Cornea
/ diagnostic imaging
Corneal Topography
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Keratectomy, Subepithelial, Laser-Assisted
/ methods
Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ
/ methods
Lasers, Excimer
/ therapeutic use
Male
Microsurgery
Myopia
/ diagnosis
Postoperative Period
Prospective Studies
Time Factors
Young Adult
Corneal biomechanics
Corneal posterior elevation
Laser-assisted subepithelial keratomileusis
Small incision lenticule extraction
Journal
Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie
ISSN: 1435-702X
Titre abrégé: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8205248
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
24
10
2018
accepted:
19
12
2018
revised:
18
12
2018
pubmed:
16
1
2019
medline:
11
4
2019
entrez:
16
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study compares the posterior corneal elevation and corneal biomechanics after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and laser-assisted subepithelial keratomileusis (LASEK) for myopia correction in a short- and long-term observation. This prospective study included 32 patients in the SMILE group and 32 patients in the LASEK group. Corneal posterior central elevation (PCE), posterior mean elevation (PME), corneal back power (Kb), and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were evaluated with Pentacam, and intraocular pressure (IOP), corneal hysteresis (CH), and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were evaluated with the ORA at pre-operation and 3 months and 3 years post-operation. Three months post-operatively, CH, CRF, and IOP decreased significantly and central posterior surface shifted backward in both groups (p < 0.05). CH was lower in the LASEK group (p = 0.03) and change of CH and CRF per unit corneal tissue removed (ΔCH/ablation depth (AD) and ΔCRF/AD) was lower in SMILE than in LASEK (p = 0.01, 0.03). Three years post-operatively, the PME shifted more posteriorly in LASEK (p = 0.04), but was stable in SMILE (p = 0.06). Kb flattened and ACD was shallower in both groups (compared to preoperative data, p < 0.001). CH in the LASEK group increased and is comparable to that in the SMILE group at 3 years post-operative. Both SMILE and LASEK can change the posterior surface and corneal biomechanics. SMILE may have less influence on corneal biomechanics than LASEK at an early stage post-operative in terms of per unit corneal tissue removed, but the effect became comparable in a long-term observation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30643965
doi: 10.1007/s00417-018-04227-5
pii: 10.1007/s00417-018-04227-5
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
601-606Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 81470657
Références
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001 Nov;27(11):1796-802
pubmed: 11709254
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Jul;120(7):896-900
pubmed: 12096959
Br J Ophthalmol. 2003 Oct;87(10):1272-8
pubmed: 14507765
Ophthalmologica. 2006;220(1):37-42
pubmed: 16374047
Exp Eye Res. 2006 Oct;83(4):709-20
pubmed: 16720023
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006 Sep;32(9):1426-31
pubmed: 16931251
J Refract Surg. 2007 Nov;23(9):888-94
pubmed: 18041241
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008 Apr;34(4):623-31
pubmed: 18361985
Cornea. 2009 Oct;28(9):1019-22
pubmed: 19724209
Cornea. 2009 Oct;28(9):976-80
pubmed: 19724217
J Refract Surg. 2009 Dec;25(12):1091-7
pubmed: 20000290
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010 Jul;51(7):3468-75
pubmed: 20207960
J Refract Surg. 2011 Apr;27(4):261-8
pubmed: 20672773
Curr Eye Res. 2013 Aug;38(8):871-9
pubmed: 23537398
Clin Exp Optom. 2014 Jan;97(1):12-7
pubmed: 23656608
Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Jan;157(1):103-109.e1
pubmed: 24452012
Ophthalmology. 2015 Apr;122(4):687-92
pubmed: 25487425
Cornea. 2015 Nov;34(11):1441-6
pubmed: 26226471
J Refract Surg. 2015 Nov;31(11):719-24
pubmed: 26444906
Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2016 Jun;39(3):191-6
pubmed: 26852167
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 10;11(2):e0148370
pubmed: 26863612
Acta Ophthalmol. 2016 Nov;94(7):e586-e591
pubmed: 27130377
PLoS One. 2016 Sep 21;11(9):e0163259
pubmed: 27655417
J Refract Surg. 2017 Feb 1;33(2):84-88
pubmed: 28192586