Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)

Purpose. To compare the long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and refractive stability following SMILE versus SMILE combined with accelerated cross-linking (SMILE XTRA), and to specifically study the regression patterns following the two procedures. Methods. This retrospective study included 5...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sheetal Brar, Skanda Sriganesh, Smith Snehal Sute, Sri Ganesh
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2022-01-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4319785
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832556416465895424
author Sheetal Brar
Skanda Sriganesh
Smith Snehal Sute
Sri Ganesh
author_facet Sheetal Brar
Skanda Sriganesh
Smith Snehal Sute
Sri Ganesh
author_sort Sheetal Brar
collection DOAJ
description Purpose. To compare the long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and refractive stability following SMILE versus SMILE combined with accelerated cross-linking (SMILE XTRA), and to specifically study the regression patterns following the two procedures. Methods. This retrospective study included 54 eyes of SMILE and 54 eyes of SMILE XTRA treated for normal and borderline cases of myopia/myopic astigmatism, respectively, based on certain predefined topographic features and risk factors. Patients in both the groups were matched for age and refractive error. The mean postoperative follow-up for the SMILE group was 22.18 ± 10.41 months and the SMILE XTRA group was 21.81 ± 10.19 months. Results. At the end of follow-up, the mean sphere, cylinder, and SE reduced to −0.03, −0.09, and −0.08 D in the SMILE group and −0.06, −0.15, and −0.13 D in the SMILE XTRA group. 96% and 93% eyes remained within ±0.50 D in SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups, respectively, and 94% eyes maintained an UDVA of 20/20 or better in the SMILE as well as SMILE XTRA groups. Safety and efficacy indices for the SMILE group were 1.03 and 1.00. For the SMILE XTRA group, the safety and efficacy indices were 1.00 and 0.99. No eye in either group had postoperative ectasia or enhancement performed for significant residual refractive error. Conclusion. Both the SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups exhibited comparable visual outcomes, safety, and efficacy. Contrary to the belief, combination of prophylactic CXL with SMILE did not result in a hyperopic shift in the long term. No eye in either group encountered postoperative ectasia; however, further follow-up is suggested to establish the long-term effects on refractive and corneal stability following SMILE XTRA, as all the eyes treated in this group were borderline.
format Article
id doaj-art-e73137e345be4cbb82e47a03a19c009f
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-0058
language English
publishDate 2022-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Ophthalmology
spelling doaj-art-e73137e345be4cbb82e47a03a19c009f2025-02-03T05:45:29ZengWileyJournal of Ophthalmology2090-00582022-01-01202210.1155/2022/4319785Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)Sheetal Brar0Skanda Sriganesh1Smith Snehal Sute2Sri Ganesh3Nethradhama Super Speciality Eye HospitalNethradhama Super Speciality Eye HospitalNethradhama Super Speciality Eye HospitalNethradhama Super Speciality Eye HospitalPurpose. To compare the long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and refractive stability following SMILE versus SMILE combined with accelerated cross-linking (SMILE XTRA), and to specifically study the regression patterns following the two procedures. Methods. This retrospective study included 54 eyes of SMILE and 54 eyes of SMILE XTRA treated for normal and borderline cases of myopia/myopic astigmatism, respectively, based on certain predefined topographic features and risk factors. Patients in both the groups were matched for age and refractive error. The mean postoperative follow-up for the SMILE group was 22.18 ± 10.41 months and the SMILE XTRA group was 21.81 ± 10.19 months. Results. At the end of follow-up, the mean sphere, cylinder, and SE reduced to −0.03, −0.09, and −0.08 D in the SMILE group and −0.06, −0.15, and −0.13 D in the SMILE XTRA group. 96% and 93% eyes remained within ±0.50 D in SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups, respectively, and 94% eyes maintained an UDVA of 20/20 or better in the SMILE as well as SMILE XTRA groups. Safety and efficacy indices for the SMILE group were 1.03 and 1.00. For the SMILE XTRA group, the safety and efficacy indices were 1.00 and 0.99. No eye in either group had postoperative ectasia or enhancement performed for significant residual refractive error. Conclusion. Both the SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups exhibited comparable visual outcomes, safety, and efficacy. Contrary to the belief, combination of prophylactic CXL with SMILE did not result in a hyperopic shift in the long term. No eye in either group encountered postoperative ectasia; however, further follow-up is suggested to establish the long-term effects on refractive and corneal stability following SMILE XTRA, as all the eyes treated in this group were borderline.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4319785
spellingShingle Sheetal Brar
Skanda Sriganesh
Smith Snehal Sute
Sri Ganesh
Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
Journal of Ophthalmology
title Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
title_full Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
title_fullStr Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
title_short Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes and Refractive Stability following SMILE versus SMILE Combined with Accelerated Cross-Linking (SMILE XTRA)
title_sort comparison of long term outcomes and refractive stability following smile versus smile combined with accelerated cross linking smile xtra
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4319785
work_keys_str_mv AT sheetalbrar comparisonoflongtermoutcomesandrefractivestabilityfollowingsmileversussmilecombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingsmilextra
AT skandasriganesh comparisonoflongtermoutcomesandrefractivestabilityfollowingsmileversussmilecombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingsmilextra
AT smithsnehalsute comparisonoflongtermoutcomesandrefractivestabilityfollowingsmileversussmilecombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingsmilextra
AT sriganesh comparisonoflongtermoutcomesandrefractivestabilityfollowingsmileversussmilecombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingsmilextra