Comparison between Small Incision Lenticule Extraction and Wavefront-Guided Femtosecond Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis in Correction of Myopic Astigmatism
Authors: Al-Boraie Khaled M , Mekkawy Tamer M. El , Metwally Mohammad G , Soliman Ashraf H 
Published: October 2021

Aim of the Work

To compare visual acuity, refractive and topographic outcome between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (WFG FS-LASIK) in patients with myopic astigmatism.

Patients and methods

This prospective, non-randomized, comparative clinical study included 60 eyes of 30 patients with simple or compound myopic astigmatism presenting for refractive error correction. Femtosecond assisted LASIK group included 30 eyes and SMILE group included 30 eyes. The following tests were done for all patients preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively: full ophthalmological examination, manifest refraction, UDVA, CDVA, corneal topography using combined schimflug and placcido disc imaging namely Pentacam. (Oculus Inc.) and wavefront analysis using ATLAS 9000 (Carl Zeiss Meditec) Main Outcome Measures: Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected disctance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction, Efficacy, safety, predictability, corneal higher order aberrations.

Results

At 3 months, the mean manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) in SMILE group was -0.33 ± 0.34 D and the mean MRSE in FS- LASIK group was 0.23 ± 0.35 D and there was a statistically significant difference between both groups (P &lt; 0.05). mean postoperative cylinder was -0.56 ± 0.28 D in SMILE group and -0.53 ± 0.38D in FS-LASIK with statistically significant difference ( P = 0.254 ) 93% and 93% of eyes in the SMILE and FS-LASIK groups were within ± 0.5 D; 96.67% and 100% of eyes in the SMILE and FS-LASIK groups, respectively, were within ± 1 D. There were 86.66% of treated eyes in the SMILE group, and 93.33% treated eyes in the FS-LASIK group that had 20/25 or better UDVA. Regarding safety, the CDVA in the SMILE group, 20 eyes (66.67%) showed no change, 8 eyes (27%) gained 1 line, 2 eyes (7%) lost 1 line, and no eyes lost more than 1 line. whereas in the FS-LASIK group, 27 eyes (90%) exhibited no change, 2 eyes (6.66%) gained 1 line, 1 eye (3.33%) lost 1 line, and no eyes lost more than 1 line and There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (P = 0. 554 ). Regarding corneal asphericity, both procedures increased Q-value with no statistically significant difference between both groups (P = 0. 052). Regarding corneal higher order aberrations, both procedures significantly increased total corneal aberrations but there was no statistically significant difference in the change in RMS of total corneal higher order aberration (P = 0.434) .but SMILE increased RMS of coma aberration significantly more than FS-LASIK (P = 0. 029).

Conclusion

both SMILE and FS-LASIK procedures have shown excellent efficacy, safety, and predictability for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. SMILE was closer to emmetropia regarding sphere and spherical equivalent, However, astigmatic undercorrection was noted after both surgeries with increased astigmatism. Both procedures increased the total corneal higher order aberrations with no statistically significant difference between both groups. A higher vertical coma was found in SMILE than WFG FS-LASIK.