Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm

Purpose. To evaluate the effect of cap-lenticule diameter difference (CLDD) on the visual outcome and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Methods. A total of 132 patients who had bilateral SMILE for myopia or myopic astigmatism were included. The CLDD was...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Banu Torun Acar, Suphi Acar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2017-01-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8259546
id doaj-8d46266a5fb64302ba3a78a7060e7d36
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8d46266a5fb64302ba3a78a7060e7d362020-11-24T20:52:38ZengHindawi LimitedJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582017-01-01201710.1155/2017/82595468259546Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mmBanu Torun Acar0Suphi Acar1Bati Goz Hospital, Istanbul, TurkeyBati Goz Hospital, Istanbul, TurkeyPurpose. To evaluate the effect of cap-lenticule diameter difference (CLDD) on the visual outcome and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Methods. A total of 132 patients who had bilateral SMILE for myopia or myopic astigmatism were included. The CLDD was 0.4 mm in 54 patients (group 1) and 1.0 mm in 78 patients (group 2). The refractive parameters, uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and HOAs were determined preoperatively and during six months follow-up. Results. Group 1 had better CDVA (in logMAR) compared to group 2 at day 1 (−0.07 ± 0.07 versus 0.04 ± 0.07, resp.; p<0.001) and week 1 (−0.07 ± 0.07 versus –0.04 ± 0.07, resp.; p=0.001). The visual acuity improved more in group 1 than in group 2. The UDVA (in logMAR) was 0.07 ± 0.07 and 0.29 ± 0.09 at day 1 (p<0.001) and −0.08 ± 0.07 and −0.06 ± 0.06 at six months (p=0.038) in group 1 and group 2, respectively. Group 1 was associated with significantly less induction of HOAs (0.24 ± 0.08 μm and 0.32 ± 0.26 μm, resp.; p=0.002). Conclusions. In SMILE, 0.4 mm CLDD is associated with better visual outcome and less induction of HOAs than 1.0 mm. Narrow CLDD should be considered in SMILE to increase the visual acuity particularly in the early postoperative period.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8259546
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Banu Torun Acar
Suphi Acar
spellingShingle Banu Torun Acar
Suphi Acar
Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
Journal of Ophthalmology
author_facet Banu Torun Acar
Suphi Acar
author_sort Banu Torun Acar
title Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
title_short Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
title_full Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
title_fullStr Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Cap-Lenticule Diameter Difference on the Visual Outcome and Higher-Order Aberrations in SMILE: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
title_sort effect of cap-lenticule diameter difference on the visual outcome and higher-order aberrations in smile: 0.4 mm versus 1.0 mm
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Journal of Ophthalmology
issn 2090-004X
2090-0058
publishDate 2017-01-01
description Purpose. To evaluate the effect of cap-lenticule diameter difference (CLDD) on the visual outcome and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Methods. A total of 132 patients who had bilateral SMILE for myopia or myopic astigmatism were included. The CLDD was 0.4 mm in 54 patients (group 1) and 1.0 mm in 78 patients (group 2). The refractive parameters, uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and HOAs were determined preoperatively and during six months follow-up. Results. Group 1 had better CDVA (in logMAR) compared to group 2 at day 1 (−0.07 ± 0.07 versus 0.04 ± 0.07, resp.; p<0.001) and week 1 (−0.07 ± 0.07 versus –0.04 ± 0.07, resp.; p=0.001). The visual acuity improved more in group 1 than in group 2. The UDVA (in logMAR) was 0.07 ± 0.07 and 0.29 ± 0.09 at day 1 (p<0.001) and −0.08 ± 0.07 and −0.06 ± 0.06 at six months (p=0.038) in group 1 and group 2, respectively. Group 1 was associated with significantly less induction of HOAs (0.24 ± 0.08 μm and 0.32 ± 0.26 μm, resp.; p=0.002). Conclusions. In SMILE, 0.4 mm CLDD is associated with better visual outcome and less induction of HOAs than 1.0 mm. Narrow CLDD should be considered in SMILE to increase the visual acuity particularly in the early postoperative period.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/8259546
work_keys_str_mv AT banutorunacar effectofcaplenticulediameterdifferenceonthevisualoutcomeandhigherorderaberrationsinsmile04mmversus10mm
AT suphiacar effectofcaplenticulediameterdifferenceonthevisualoutcomeandhigherorderaberrationsinsmile04mmversus10mm
_version_ 1716799132090236928