Scholarlink

Purpose <p>To analyze the refractive outcomes and changes in corneal aberrations after PRK and SMILE surgeries, and to compare these two methods.</p> Patients and methods <p>This retrospective comparative study investigated patients aged 20–40 years who underwent SMILE or PRK for the correction of myopia between − 1.00 D and − 2.00 D, along with a cylindrical power of -0.50 D or lower. Preoperative and 6-month postoperative assessments included uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and corneal aberrations such as higher-order aberrations (HOA), spherical aberrations (SA), vertical coma (Z3,-1), horizontal coma (Z3,1), oblique trefoil (Z3,-3), and horizontal trefoil (Z3,3).</p> Results <p>A total of 73 eyes from 73 patients (37 SMILE and 36 PRK) were analysed. Both groups showed significant improvement in UCVA and refractive parameters (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), while BCVA remained stable (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). Postoperative corneal aberrations increased in both groups, with no significant intergroup differences (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05).</p> Conclusions <p>Both SMILE and PRK are effective and safe for the correction of low myopia, with comparable refractive outcomes and visual quality. Despite an increase in corneal aberrations in both techniques, their impact on overall visual performance is similar. Procedure selection should be individualized based on patient-specific factors and lifestyle.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative analysis of myopia correction outcomes and aberration changes between PRK and SMILE: A study based on strict refractive criteria

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月12日

查看全文
  • Bekir Küçük,
  • Mahmut Erkam Arslan,
  • Ender Sırakaya

摘要

Purpose

To analyze the refractive outcomes and changes in corneal aberrations after PRK and SMILE surgeries, and to compare these two methods.

Patients and methods

This retrospective comparative study investigated patients aged 20–40 years who underwent SMILE or PRK for the correction of myopia between − 1.00 D and − 2.00 D, along with a cylindrical power of -0.50 D or lower. Preoperative and 6-month postoperative assessments included uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and corneal aberrations such as higher-order aberrations (HOA), spherical aberrations (SA), vertical coma (Z3,-1), horizontal coma (Z3,1), oblique trefoil (Z3,-3), and horizontal trefoil (Z3,3).

Results

A total of 73 eyes from 73 patients (37 SMILE and 36 PRK) were analysed. Both groups showed significant improvement in UCVA and refractive parameters (p < 0.05), while BCVA remained stable (p > 0.05). Postoperative corneal aberrations increased in both groups, with no significant intergroup differences (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Both SMILE and PRK are effective and safe for the correction of low myopia, with comparable refractive outcomes and visual quality. Despite an increase in corneal aberrations in both techniques, their impact on overall visual performance is similar. Procedure selection should be individualized based on patient-specific factors and lifestyle.