Evaluation of the Difference between Predicted and Measured Central Corneal Thickness Reduction after SMILE and Femtosecond Laser-assisted LASIK for Myopia

References

• Spiru B, Kling S, Hafezi F, Sekundo W. Biomechanical properties of human cornea tested by two-dimensional extensiometry ex vivo in fellow eyes: femtosecond laser-assisted lasik versus smile. J Refract Surg. 2018;34(6):419–23. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20180402-05.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santhiago MR, Smadja D, Gomes BF, Mello GR, Monteiro ML, Wilson SE, Randleman JB. Association between the percent tissue altered and post-laser in situ keratomileusis ectasia in eyes with normal preoperative topography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158(1):87–95 e81. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2014.04.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luft N, Priglinger SG, Ring MH, Mayer WJ, Mursch-Edlmayr AS, Kreutzer TC, Bolz M, Dirisamer M. Stromal remodeling and lenticule thickness accuracy in small-incision lenticule extraction: one-year results. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;43(6):812–18. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivarsen A, Fledelius W, Hjortdal JO. Three-year changes in epithelial and stromal thickness after prk or lasik for high myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50(5):2061–66. doi:10.1167/iovs.08-2853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Corneal ablation depth readout of the mel 80 excimer laser compared to artemis three-dimensional very high-frequency digital ultrasound stromal measurements. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(12):949–59. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20100114-02.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim BK, Mun SJ, Yang YH, Kim JS, Moon JH, Chung YT. Comparison of anterior segment changes after femtosecond laser lasik and smile using a dual rotating scheimpflug analyzer. BMC Ophthalmol. 2019;19(1):251. doi:10.1186/s12886-019-1257-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Febbraro JL, Picard H, Moran S, Grise-Dulac A, Salomon L, Gatinel D. Comparison of laser platform estimation and objective measurement of maximum ablation depth using scheimpflug pachymetry in myopic femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis. Cornea. 2020;39(3):316–20. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000002143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labiris G, Sideroudi H, Giarmoukakis A, Koukoula S, Pagonis G, Kozobolis VP. Evaluation of the difference between intended and measured ablation and its impact on refractive outcomes of the wavefront optimize profile and the s001 wellington nomogram in myopic spherocylindrical corrections. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2012;40(2):127–33. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02633.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villavicencio O, Belin MW, Ambrosio R Jr., Steinmueller A. Corneal pachymetry: new ways to look at an old measurement. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014;40(5):695–701. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.04.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbelaez MC, Vidal C, Arba Mosquera S. Central ablation depth and postoperative refraction in excimer laser myopic correction measured with ultrasound, scheimpflug, and optical coherence pachymetry. J Refract Surg. 2009;25(8):699–708. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20090707-04.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu F, Yin H, Yang Y. Contralateral eye comparison between 2 cap thicknesses in small incision lenticule extraction: 110 versus 130 mum. Cornea. 2019;38(5):617–23. doi:10.1097/ICO.0000000000001835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz J, Zeger S, Liang KY. Appropriate statistical methods to account for similarities in binary outcomes between fellow eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:2461–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smadja D, Santhiago MR, Mello GR, Roberts CJ, Dupps WJ Jr., Krueger RR. Response of the posterior corneal surface to myopic laser in situ keratomileusis with different ablation depths. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(7):1222–31. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.02.044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baek T, Lee K, Kagaya F, Tomidokoro A, Amano S, Oshika T. Factors affecting the forward shift of posterior corneal surface after laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(2):317–20. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(00)00502-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maloca PM, Studer HP, Ambrosio R Jr., Goldblum D, Rothenbuehler S, Barthelmes D, Zweifel S, Scholl HPN, Balaskas K, Tufail A, et al. Interdevice variability of central corneal thickness measurement. PLoS One. 2018;13(9):e0203884. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203884.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer JJ, Gokul A, Vellara HR, Prime Z, McGhee CN. Repeatability and agreement of orbscan ii, pentacam hr, and galilei tomography systems in corneas with keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017:175122–128. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2016.12.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu W, Wang Y, Xu L. Meta-analysis of pentacam vs. Ultrasound Pachymetry in Central Corneal Thickness Measurement in Normal, Post-lasik or Prk, and Keratoconic or Keratoconus-suspect Eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2014;252:91–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aramberri J, Araiz L, Garcia A, Illarramendi I, Olmos J, Oyanarte I, Romay A, Vigara I. Dual versus single scheimpflug camera for anterior segment analysis: precision and agreement. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(11):1934–49. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.06.049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erie JC, Hodge DO, Bourne WM. Confocal microscopy evaluation of stromal ablation depth after myopic laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30(2):321–25. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2003.09.058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savini G, Cummings AB, Balducci N, Barboni P, Huang J, Lombardo M, Serrao S, Ducoli P. Agreement between predicted and measured ablation depth after femtosecond laser-assisted lasik for myopia. J Refract Surg. 2016;32(3):164–70. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20160121-03.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Febbraro JL, Picard H, Moran S, Grise-Dulac A, Salomon L, Gatinel D. Comparison of laser platform estimation and objective measurement of maximum ablation depth using scheimpflug pachymetry in myopic femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis. Cornea. 2020;39(3):316–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanellopoulos AJ, Georgiadou S, Asimellis G. Objective evaluation of planned versus achieved stromal thickness reduction in myopic femtosecond laser-assisted lasik. J Refract Surg. 2015;31(9):628–32. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20150820-09.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang D, Li Y, Sun M, Guo N, Zhang F. Lenticule thickness accuracy and influence in predictability and stability for different refractive errors after smile in chinese myopic eyes. Curr Eye Res. 2019;44(1):96–101. doi:10.1080/02713683.2018.1532011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randleman JB, Dawson DG, Grossniklaus HE, McCarey BE, Edelhauser HF. Depth-dependent cohesive tensile strength in human donor corneas: implications for refractive surgery. J Refract Surg. 2008;24(1):S85–89. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20080101-15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinha Roy A, Dupps WJ Jr., Roberts CJ. Comparison of biomechanical effects of small-incision lenticule extraction and laser in situ keratomileusis: finite-element analysis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014;40(6):971–80. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.08.065.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damgaard IB, Ivarsen A, Hjortdal J. Refractive correction and biomechanical strength following smile with a 110- or 160-mum cap thickness, evaluated ex vivo by inflation test. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018;59(5):1836–43. doi:10.1167/iovs.17-23675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee H, Kang DSY, Reinstein DZ, Roberts CJ, Ambrosio R Jr., Archer TJ, Jean SK, Kim EK, Seo KY, Jun I, et al. Adjustment of spherical equivalent correction according to cap thickness for myopic small incision lenticule extraction. J Refract Surg. 2019;35(3):153–60. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20190205-01.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar