Author:
Luo Wuqiang,Aruma Aruma,Li Meiyan,Wang Jing,Xie Jing,Xiao Xin,Shen Yang,Niu Lingling,Wang Xiaoying,Zhou Xingtao
Abstract
Abstract
Background
To compare the 4-year visual outcomes of implantable collamer lens V4c (EVO-ICL) implantation and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for high myopia and astigmatism.
Methods
This retrospective case study included 64 eyes of 40 patients. These patients with preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (SE) between − 6.00 and − 10.00 diopters (D) were screened from the database of SMILE and EVO-ICL implantation procedures in 2015. The ICL group [32 eyes of 19 patients (mean age, 29.6 ± 6.3 years); mean SE, -8.71 ± 1.06 D] and SMILE group [32 eyes of 21 patients (mean age, 27.7 ± 5.6 years); mean SE, -8.35 ± 0.65D] were compared. All patients were then prospectively examined at a four-year follow-up for routine postoperative examinations, higher-order ocular aberrations, retinal image quality and a questionnaire.
Results
The safety indexes were 1.15 ± 0.14 and 1.22 ± 0.21 (P = 0.36) for the SMILE and ICL groups, respectively. No eyes lost two or more lines of CDVA in either group. The efficacy indexes were 0.97 ± 0.16 and 0.96 ± 0.19 (P = 0.87), respectively. Twenty-three eyes (72%) in ICL and 26 eyes (81%) in SMILE groups were within ± 0.5 D of the attempted SE (P < 0.01). ICL-treated eyes had significantly less spherical aberration and coma (P < 0.01 and < 0.05, respectively) postoperatively. Halos were the prevalent visual disturbance in both groups.
Conclusion
SMILE and EVO-ICL implantation provided safe and effective correction of high myopia. SMILE showed slightly better long-term predictability. Mild postoperative visual disturbances were observed after ICL and SMILE at 4-year follow-up.
Funder
the Health Commission of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
National Natural Science Foundation of China
the Project of Shanghai Science and Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Ophthalmology,General Medicine