IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0242059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction versus femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for high myopia: A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yanyan Fu
  • Yewei Yin
  • Xiaoying Wu
  • Yuanjun Li
  • Aiqun Xiang
  • Ying Lu
  • Qiuman Fu
  • Tu Hu
  • Kaixuan Du
  • Dan Wen

Abstract

Aim: To compare postoperative clinical outcomes of high myopia after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK). Methods: From March 2018 to July 2020, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and several Chinese databases were comprehensively searched. The studies meeting the criteria were selected and included; the data were extracted by 2 independent authors. The clinical outcome parameters were analyzed with RevMan 5.3. Results: This meta-analysis included twelve studies involving 766 patients (1400 eyes: 748 receiving SMILE and 652 receiving FS-LASIK). Pooled results revealed no significant differences in the following outcomes: the logarithm of the mean angle of resolution (logMAR) of postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.02 to 0.00, I2 = 0%, P = 0.07 at 1 mo; WMD = -0.00, 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01, I2 = 0%, P = 0.83 at 3 mo; WMD = -0.00, 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.00, I2 = 32%, P = 0.33 in the long term), and the postoperative mean refractive spherical equivalent (WMD = -0.03, 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.03, I2 = 13%, P = 0.30). However, the SMILE group had significantly better postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) than the FS-LASIK group (WMD = -0.04, 95% CI, -0.05 to -0.02, I2 = 0%, P

Suggested Citation

  • Yanyan Fu & Yewei Yin & Xiaoying Wu & Yuanjun Li & Aiqun Xiang & Ying Lu & Qiuman Fu & Tu Hu & Kaixuan Du & Dan Wen, 2021. "Clinical outcomes after small-incision lenticule extraction versus femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for high myopia: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0242059
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242059
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242059&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0242059?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0242059. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.