Surface Ablation Versus CIRCLE for Myopic Enhancement After SMILE: A Matched Comparative Study

Corneal Epithelial Remodeling Induced by Photorefractive Keratectomy Enhancement After Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction

Purpose

To assess changes in corneal epithelial thickness (ET) within 9-mm diameter cornea after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) retreatment after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

Methods

A total of 28 eyes of 19 patients with mean spherical equivalent of -1.30 ± 0.60 D who underwent retreatment after SMILE were included in this retrospective study. ET mapped across a 9-mm diameter area was obtained using wide-field optical coherence tomography (OCT) before and at one, three, and six months after surgery. The ET changes were compared between the different time points and analyzed zones.

Results

Before enhancement, the ET were 63.64 ± 6.01 µm and 61.25 ± 4.32 µm in central and paracentral zones, respectively. The ET of central and paracentral zones significantly decreased at one month and subsequently increased until six months. Six months after surgery, significant epithelial thickening occurred in 2- to 9-mm diameter cornea (all P < 0.05), whereas no significant change was observed in central 2-mm diameter cornea (P = 0.460). There was no significant difference in the ET between the central and paracentral zones (P = 1.00). The degree of myopic correction significantly correlated with the average ET in the central (P = 0.046) and paracentral (P = 0.033) zones at six months after PRK enhancement. No significant correlation was detected between the average ET of all zones and the postoperative spherical equivalent at six months after surgery (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions

PRK enhancement did not alter the overall trend of corneal epithelial remodeling induced by SMILE. An asymmetric and flatter lenticule-like pattern of epithelial remodeling was observed six months after surgery, which did not affect the refractive outcomes.

Translational Relevance

An asymmetric and centrally flattened lenticule-like pattern of epithelial remodeling was observed after PRK enhancement. Surgeons should consider expanding the intended optical zones for enhancement surgery after SMILE.

Management of Corneal Haze After Photorefractive Keratectomy

Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is a safe and popular corneal surgery performed worldwide. Nevertheless, there is potential risk of corneal haze development after surgery. Proper management of post PRK haze is important for good visual outcome. We performed a comprehensive review of the literature on the various risk factors and treatments for PRK haze, searching the PubMed, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, and Embase databases using relevant search terms. All articles in English from August 1989 through April 2023 were reviewed for this study, among which 102 articles were chosen to be included in the study. Depending on the characteristics of and examination findings on post PRK haze, different management options may be preferred. In the proposed framework, management of PRK haze should include a full workup that includes patient's subjective complaints and loss of vision as well as visual acuity, biomicroscopy, anterior segment optical coherence tomography, epithelial mapping, and Scheimpflug densitometry. Topical steroid treatment for haze should be stratified based on early- or late-onset haze. Mechanical debridement or superficial phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) may be used to treat superficial corneal haze. Deep PTK and/or PRK can be used to treat deep corneal haze. Mitomycin-C and topical steroids are prophylactic post-surgery agents to prevent recurrence of haze.

Refractive Corneal Lenticule Extraction With the CLEAR Femtosecond Laser Application

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate a new femtosecond laser application for refractive corneal lenticule extraction with suction control and computerized regulation of centration and alignment (Ziemer CLEAR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, consecutive, noncomparative case series study. Patients undergoing CLEAR for spherical equivalent (SE) between -3 and -10 D, evaluating SE, defocus equivalent, refractive astigmatism, visual acuity, and centration at 10 months were evaluated in the study.

RESULTS

Fifty-three eyes of 42 patients (mean age 40.4 ± 8.6 years) were included, with preoperative SE -5.99 ± 1.49 D and mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) of 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR. With no suction losses, an intact lenticule was extracted in all eyes. In 6 eyes, peripheral adhesion was resolved by lenticulerrhexis, and in 1 eye, the incision was opened by a crescent blade. Moderate interface inflammation occurred in 3 eyes. At day 1, in the 42 eyes with uneventful surgery, the mean CDVA was 20/27, whereas in the 11 eyes with extra surgical manipulations, it was 20/36 ( P = 0.04). At 10 months, for the 53 eyes, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.05 ± 0.09 logMAR; in 37 eyes (70%), it was 20/25 or better; and the mean CDVA was 0.04 ± 0.06 logMAR. Eight eyes (15%) lost 1 logMAR line. The mean SE was -0.13 ± 0.15 D. The mean defocus equivalent was 0.33 ± 0.32 D, with 46 eyes (87%) ≤0.50 D and 52 eyes (98%) ≤1 D. Refractive astigmatism was ≤0.50 D in 48 eyes (90%). The efficacy index was 1.00, and the safety index was 0.98. The mean decentration from the corneal vertex was 0.28 ± 0.07 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The application yielded good predictability, efficacy, and safety. Slower visual recovery was observed after extra surgical manipulations.

Visual outcomes of early enhancement following small incision lenticule extraction versus laser in situ keratomileusis

Purpose

To compare visual outcomes of early enhancement following small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) versus laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

Methods

Retrospective analysis of eyes (patients operated in the setting of a tertiary eye care hospital between 2014 and 2020) requiring early enhancement (within one year of primary surgery) was conducted. Stability of refractive error, corneal tomography, and anterior segment Optical Coherence Tomography (AS-OCT) for epithelial thickness was performed. The correction post regression was done using photorefractive keratectomy and flap lift in eyes, wherein the primary procedure was SMILE and LASIK, respectively. Pre- and post enhancement corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA and UDVA), mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), and cylinder were analyzed. IBM SPSS statistical software.

Results

In total, 6350 and 8176 eyes post SMILE and LASIK, respectively, were analyzed. Of these, 32 eyes of 26 patients (0.5%) post SMILE and 36 eyes of 32 patients (0.44%) post-LASIK required enhancement. Post enhancement (flap lift in LASIK, and PRK in SMILE group) UDVA was logMAR 0.02 ± 0.05 and 0.09 ± 0.16 (P = 0.009), respectively. There was no significant difference between the refractive sphere (P = 0.33) and MRSE (P = 0.09). In total, 62.5% of the eyes in the SMILE group and 80.5% in the LASIK group had a UDVA of 20/20 or better (P = 0.04).

Conclusion

PRK post SMILE demonstrated comparable results to flap lift post LASIK and is a safe and effective approach for early enhancement post SMILE.

[Enhancement Options after Lens and Corneal Refractive Surgery]

BACKGROUND

 Modern preoperative diagnostics as well as current surgical techniques allow cataract and refractive surgery to deliver precise refractive results.Occasionally, unsatisfactory refractive and visual results occur despite all the care taken. In these cases, subsequent improvement is required to achieve the best final visual outcome. This article shows the therapeutic options for the treatment of residual refractive errors after lens and corneal refractive surgery.

KEY MESSAGES

 The causes of postoperative refractive errors after refractive laser- or lens-based procedures are very diverse and require extensive workup of the cause as well as an individual solution to achieve the desired result. Before any further surgical intervention, specific complications of the primary procedure as well as concomitant ocular diseases must be excluded or treated. The appropriate enhancement after keratorefractive surgery depends primarily on the type of primary surgery, residual stromal thickness, possible complications from the initial surgery, and the patient's personal preference. For enhancements using surface treatments, such as PRK, the use of mitomycin C is recommended for prophylaxis of haze formation. After lens surgery, for low-grade postoperative refractive errors (spherical and astigmatic), keratorefractive enhancements provide the most accurate results. For higher refractive errors, lens-based procedures can be used, with add-on IOLs being safer and more precise compared with one IOL exchange. Low astigmatisms can be successfully treated with LRI or keratorefractive surgery, but higher astigmatisms should be corrected with an IOL exchange in the early postoperative period and with an add-on IOL in the later postoperative period. IOL explantations should be performed very cautiously, especially in cases of pronounced capsular fibrosis, previous posterior capsulotomy, and existing weakness of the zonular apparatus.

Enhancement-Optionen nach Linsen- und refraktiver Hornhautchirurgie

Gelegentlich kommt es trotz aller Sorgfalt und präziser Operationstechnik in der Katarakt- und Refraktivchirurgie zu unbefriedigenden refraktiven und visuellen Ergebnissen. In diesen Fällen ist eine nachträgliche Korrektur erforderlich, um das beste endgültige visuelle Ergebnis zu erzielen. Dieser Beitrag zeigt die Möglichkeiten zur Behandlung residualer Refraktionsfehler nach Linsen- und refraktiver Hornhautchirurgie auf.

Corneal biomechanical characteristics following small incision lenticule extraction for myopia and astigmatism with 3 different cap thicknesses

BACKGROUND

The design of cap thickness for small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) plays a role in post-laser vision correction (post-LVC) corneal biomechanics. This study aimed to compare the corneal biomechanical characteristics following SMILE with different cap thicknesses of 110 μm, 120 μm, and 130 μm for myopia and myopic astigmatism correction.

METHODS

Seventy-five patients (146 eyes) who underwent SMILE with designed cap thickness of 110 μm, 120 μm, and 130 μm were recruited at the Eye Center of Beijing Tongren Hospital between August 2020 and November 2021. Visual acuity, refraction, and corneal biomechanical parameters were measured preoperatively, 1 week and 1, 3, 6 months postoperatively. One-way analysis of variances (ANOVA) with Bonferroni correction or Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to compare the parameters among different groups. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction or Friedman test was applied for comparing the parameters within different follow-up times.

RESULTS

Uncorrected distance visual acuity of 110-μm group was better only at 1-week and 1-month postoperatively (P = 0.012, 0.037). There were no significant differences in spherical equivalent, nor in Corvis biomechanical index-laser vision correction (CBI-LVC). All the parameters reached stability at 3-month postoperatively. Integrated radius (IR) and deformation amplitude ratio 2 mm (DA ratio 2 mm) in 120-μm and 130-μm groups were higher than 110-μm group at 1-month postoperatively (P = 0.019, 0.002). So was Ambrósio relational thickness (ARTh) at 6-month postoperatively (P = 0.011). Stiffness parameter at applanation A1 (SP-A1), stress-strain index (SSI), biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) were highest in 130-μm group, followed by 120-μm group, then 110-μm group at 3-month (P<0.001, P = 0.030, P = 0.027, P = 0.008) and 6-month (P<0.001, P = 0.002, P = 0.0023, P = 0.001) postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The corneal stiffness following SMILE was greatest with 130-μm cap, followed by 120-μm cap, then 110-μm cap. 130-μm cap might have advantages in terms of corneal biomechanics and retreatment option. The SMILE-designed protocol should be customized in practice.

Photorefractive Keratectomy Enhancement (PRK) After Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE)

Purpose

To determine rates of enhancement and visual prognosis following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) enhancement of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

Patients and Methods

This retrospective, single-site study reviewed all cases of primary SMILE at Hoopes Vision in Draper, Utah between March 14, 2017 and April 8, 2022 to identify any cases that required follow-up enhancement. Primary SMILE was performed using Visumax 500 kHz femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). All enhancements were performed with alcohol-assisted PRK, using a WaveLight EX500 excimer laser (Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX).

Results

Four hundred and five eyes underwent primary SMILE, of which 15 later underwent PRK enhancement (enhancement rate of 3.7%). No significant difference in pre-SMILE data was identified between the enhancement and non-enhancement groups. The average age of those who underwent PRK enhancement was 33.8±6.3 years old and ranged from 25 to 45. Following primary SMILE, 13 eyes (87%) had an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/40 or better, and none had a UDVA of 20/20 or better. After one year of post-enhancement follow-up, all eyes had a UDVA of 20/40 or better, and 13 eyes (87%) had a UDVA of 20/20 or better (Figure 1). All were within one diopter of target spherical equivalent (SEQ), 13 (87%) were within 0.50 D, and 10 (67%) were within 0.25 D. Of those with 12-month follow-up data, none had UDVA worse than corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and none had lost lines of CDVA. Efficacy and safety indices were 1.03 and 0.99, respectively.

Conclusion

Following SMILE, ophthalmologists may anticipate an enhancement rate of one to seven percent. In these cases, PRK is a safe and effective procedure for enhancement of SMILE.

SmartSurfACE transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy with mitomycin C enhancement after small incision lenticule extraction

Background

To evaluate predictability, stability, efficacy, and safety of transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TPRK) using smart pulse technology (SPT) (SmartSurface procedure) of Schwind Amaris with mitomycin C for correction of post small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) myopic residual refractive errors.

Method

This study is a prospective, non-comparative case series conducted at a private eye centre in Ismailia, Egypt, on eyes with post-SMILE myopic residual refractive errors because of undercorrection or suction loss (suction loss occurred after the posterior lenticular cut and the creation of side-cuts; redocking was attempted, and the treatment was completed in the same session with the same parameters) with myopia or myopic astigmatism. The patients were followed up post-SMILE for six months before the SmartSurface procedure, and then they were followed up for one year after that. TPRK were performed using Amaris excimer laser at 500 kHz. The main outcomes included refractive predictability, stability, efficacy, safety and any reported complications.

Results

This study included 68 eyes of 40 patients out of 1920 total eyes (3.5%) with post-SMILE technique myopic residual refractive errors. The average duration between the SMILE surgery and TPRK was 6.7 ± 0.4 months (range 6 to 8 months). The mean refractive spherical equivalent (SE) was within ± 0.50 D of plano correction in 100% of the eyes at 12 months post-TPRK. Astigmatism of < 0.50 D was achieved in 100% of the eyes. The mean of the residual SE error showed statistically significant improvement from preoperative − 1.42 ± 0.52 D to 0.23 ± 0.10 D (P < 0.0001). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) (measured by Snellen's chart and averaged in logMAR units) was improved significantly to 0.1 ± 0.07 (P < 0.0001). UDVA was 0.2 logMAR or better in 100% of the eyes, 0.1 logMAR or better in 91.2% of the eyes, and 0.0 logMAR in 20.6% of the eyes. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) remained unchanged in 79.4% of eyes. 14.7% of eyes gained one line of CDVA (Snellen). 5.9% of eyes gained two lines of CDVA (Snellen).

Conclusion

Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy using smart pulse technology with mitomycin C enhancement after SMILE is a safe, predictable, stable, and effective technique.

Research Progress on Morphological Changes and Surgery-related Parameters of Corneal Cap in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is an "all-in-one" surgical method for refractive correction. An advantage of the SMILE over traditional surgery is that it depends on the corneal cap's design. This review discusses the morphological evaluation of the corneal cap, selection of the corneal cap with different thickness and diameters, influence of the corneal cap design on retreatment, and management of corneal cap-related complications. The following points should be recognized to define the correct morphology and design of the operation-related parameters of the corneal cap during SMILE: (1) the thickness and diameter of the corneal cap are predictable and influence postoperative visual quality, (2) the change in anterior surface curvature of the corneal cap should be considered in the design of nomogram value, (3) for patients with moderate myopic correction, early visual quality is better with a 6.9-mm than with a 7.5-mm diameter corneal cap, (4) there is no significant difference in visual quality or biomechanics among corneal caps with different thickness; (5) primary corneal cap thickness plays an important role in the SMILE retreatment, (6) a 7.78-mm diameter corneal cap has a greater risk of suction loss than a 7.60-mm diameter corneal cap, (6) if suction loss occurs when lenticular scanning exceeds 10%, then SMILE can be continued by changing corneal cap thickness, (7) preventive collagen cross-linking with SMILE caps are 90-120 μm thick and 7-7.8 mm in diameter, and (8) properly treating SMILE-related complications ensures better postoperative results. The data presented herein shall deepen the understanding of the importance of the corneal cap during SMILE and provide diversified analysis for personalized operational design of corneal cap parameters.

Impact of extreme (flat and steep) keratometry on the safety and efficacy of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE)

Little is known about the connection between preoperative keratometry and postoperative results of myopic small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). To determine the influence of extreme (flat and steep) corneal keratometry on the safety and efficacy of SMILE, the databases of the Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Germany, and SMILE Eyes Linz, Austria, were screened for patients with steep and flat keratometry who had undergone SMILE. In this cross-sectional matched comparative cohort study, eyes with markedly flat (< 42.0 diopters; D) or steep (≥ 47.0D) preoperative corneal keratometry were matched to a cohort of eyes with regular keratometry (42.0-46.9D) by preoperative manifest refractive spherical equivalent and cylinder, age, corrected distance visual acuity and surgical SMILE parameters. The standardized graphs and terms for refractive surgery results were applied to compare the three groups. Changes in higher order aberrations (HOAs) were evaluated on Scheimpflug imaging. In total, 63 eyes (21 each) of 54 patients with a mean refractive spherical equivalent of  - 5.21 ± 1.59 D were followed up for a mean of 9.2 ± 6.1 (minimum ≥ 3) months. Mean baseline keratometry was 41.3 ± 0.7D (flat), 45.5 ± 1.0D (regular) and 47.7 ± 0.6D (steep) (p < 0.0001). Compared to the regular group, the flat and the steep cornea group resulted in a non-inferior percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D of target refraction (p = 0.20), uncorrected distance visual acuity (p = 0.95) and corrected distance visual acuity (p = 0.20). Flat corneas however experienced a stronger induction of spherical aberration (SA) compared to the steep group (p = 0.0005). In conclusion, non-inferior outcomes of SMILE can also be expected in eyes with steep (≥ 47D) or flat (< 42D) preoperative keratometry, while SMILE however induces more SA in eyes with a flat keratometry.

Decade - long journey with small incision lenticule extraction: The learnings

Over the past decade, small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) has revolutionized the field of keratorefractive surgery. With the promise of superior corneal biomechanics and reduced postoperative dry eye, SMILE afforded a distinct advantage over flap-based procedures. Our evolving understanding of the surgical technique and management of its unique complications has further enhanced the outcomes. This review will highlight specific pearls on various preoperative and intraoperative principles allowing optimization of outcomes with SMILE.

Complications of small incision lenticule extraction

The procedure of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) was introduced in 2011, and since then there has been an increase in the number of cases undergoing this procedure worldwide. The surgery has a learning curve and may be associated with problems in the intraoperative and postoperative periods. The intraoperative problems during SMILE surgery include the loss of suction, the occurrence of altered or irregular opaque bubble layer and black spots, difficulty in lenticular dissection and extraction, cap perforation, incision-related problems, and decentered ablation. Most of the postoperative problems are similar as in other laser refractive procedures, but with decreased incidence. The identification of risk factors, clinical features, and management of complications of SMILE help to obtain optimum refractive outcomes.

SMILE – Small Incision Lenticule Extraction

Die SMILE (small incision lenticule extraction) zählt zu den Verfahren der refraktiven Lentikel-Extraktion und hat sich im letzten Jahrzehnt zu einem etablierten Bestandteil des modernen refraktivchirurgischen Spektrums entwickelt. Dieser Beitrag gibt einen Überblick über Patientenselektion, Operationsmethode, mögliche Komplikationen und klinische Ergebnisse dieser Methode.

[SMILE - Small Incision Lenticule Extraction]

Refractive lenticule extraction is a corneal surgical technique that uses a femtosecond laser exclusively to create an intrastromal refractive lenticule for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. In small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) the generated refractive lenticule is subsequently extracted through a small incision. The reported efficacy, predictability and safety of the flap-less SMILE procedure is similar to those of femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Advantages of SMILE over LASIK include less iatrogenic dry eye, fewer induced higher-order aberrations, and potentially less biomechanical weakening of the cornea. However, there is a steeper surgeon learning curve for SMILE as the procedure is technically more challenging than LASIK. Furthermore, the current SMILE laser platform cannot use cyclotorsion control or eye-tracking technology and retreatment options are more complex compared to LASIK. This review looks at patient selection, surgical method, possible complications, retreatment options, and postoperative outcome of the SMILE technique.

Astigmatism Correction Using SMILE

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) was introduced in the recent decade for the treatment of myopia and myopic astigmatism. This flap-free technique has a high efficacy and safety profile and also carries potential advantages over laser in situ keratomileusis such as a better corneal biomechanical stability, reduction in dry eyes rate, and the avoidance of flap complications. However, there have been concerns regarding the precision of astigmatism correction that undercorrection has been reported to be apparent. Various factors that affect astigmatism correction have been identified in the literature. The purpose of this review is to discuss the factors that affect astigmatism correction in SMILE and several techniques to improve the refractive outcomes.

Enhancement Options After Myopic Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE): A Review

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of the currently available retreatment methods after myopic small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

METHODS

The PubMed library was searched for articles containing the terms "small-incision lenticule extraction" and "enhancement" or "retreatment". The last search was performed on May 1, 2019.

RESULTS

In contrast to laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), which can be retreated by a flap relift, repeat SMILE retreatment is currently not approved and only seldomly performed. As substitutes, surface ablation, cap-to-flap conversion using the CIRCLE program in the VisuMax platform, and thin-flap LASIK have been recently established. While all options offer safety and efficacy comparable to LASIK retreatments, each has its patient-specific advantages and disadvantages. While surface ablation preserves the flap-free approach of the primary procedure, the aspect of pain and a slow visual recovery might render it less attractive as compared with CIRCLE and thin-flap LASIK which offer quick recovery, however at the price of flap creation. Besides, each retreatment method generates specific tissue responses and has a different impact on corneal biomechanics, which is strongly dependent on the previous SMILE parameters, especially the cap thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

Refractive enhancement after SMILE is currently mostly performed by surface ablation, CIRCLE cap-to-flap conversion or thin-flap LASIK, which all offer safety and efficacy comparable to LASIK retreatments. In this review, a detailed overview over each method, its technical aspects, and specific advantages and disadvantages is given.