• Users Online: 327
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 33  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 33-38

Small incision lenticule extraction versus photorefractive keratectomy: A comparative study


Department of Cornea and Refractive Surgery, Prasad Netralaya Super Specialty Eye Hospital, Udupi, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Reshmi Sreekumari
Sreepuri, Balussery P.O., Kozhikode - 673 612, Kerala
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/kjo.kjo_73_20

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to compare the objective and subjective quality of vision following small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). We compared the postoperative safety, efficacy, predictability, refractive stability, contrast sensitivity, and spherical aberration changes in two groups over a 1-year follow-up period. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study of 1-year duration. Fifty eyes of patients who underwent SMILE and 50 eyes of patients who underwent PRK were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Methodology: Standard preoperative evaluation for all patients included corneal topography, refraction, anterior segment, retina evaluation, and intraocular pressure. Uncorrected visual acuity, best-corrected visual acuity, spherical aberration, and contrast sensitivity were measured preoperatively followed by 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively. Results: Ninety-six percent of the eyes of patients who underwent SMILE and 92% of the eyes of patients who underwent PRK achieved postoperative refraction within ±0.5 D of the intended target refraction. No eyes in both the groups had any loss of visual acuity. Both procedures induced statistically significant spherical aberrations. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). One hundred percent of eyes in SMILE and PRK group were noted to have a stable postoperative refraction till the last follow-up. Contrast sensitivity was better in eyes of patients who underwent SMILE comparing to PRK. Conclusion: Overall, both SMILE and PRK have shown excellent safety, efficacy, and predictability for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. SMILE is better in terms of refractive accuracy and quality of vision.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed154    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded23    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal