Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) versus Femtosecond Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for Myopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- PMID: 27367803
- PMCID: PMC4930219
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158176
Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) versus Femtosecond Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for Myopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Purpose: The goal of this study was to compare small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) with femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) for treating myopia.
Methods: The CENTRAL, EMBASE, PubMed databases and a Chinese database (SinoMed) were searched in May of 2016. Twelve studies with 1,076 eyes, which included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine cohorts, met our inclusion criteria. The overall quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group framework. Data were extracted and analysed at three to six months postoperatively. Primary outcome measures included a loss of one or more lines of best spectacle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better, mean logMAR UCVA, postoperative mean spherical equivalent (SE) and postoperative refraction within ±1.0 D of the target refraction. Secondary outcome measures included ocular surface disease index (OSDI), tear breakup time (TBUT) and Schirmer's 1 test (S1T) as dry eye parameters, along with corneal sensitivity.
Results: The overall quality of evidence was considered to be low to very low. Pooled results revealed no significant differences between the two groups with regard to a loss of one or more lines in the BSCVA (OR 1.71; 95% CI: 0.81, 3.63; P = 0.16), UCVA of 20/20 or better (OR 0.71; 95% CI: 0.44, 1.15; P = 0.16), logMAR UCVA (MD 0.00; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.04; P = 0.87), postoperative refractive SE (MD -0.00; 95% CI: -0.05, 0.05; P = 0.97) or postoperative refraction within ±1.0 D of the target refraction (OR 0.78; 95% CI: 0.22, 2.77; P = 0.70) within six months postoperatively. The pooled analysis also indicated that the FS-LASIK group suffered more severely from dry eye symptoms (OSDI; MD -6.68; 95% CI: -11.76, -2.00; P = 0.006) and lower corneal sensitivity (MD 12.40; 95% CI: 10.23, 14.56; P < 0.00001) at six months postoperatively.
Conclusions: In conclusion, both FS-LASIK and SMILE are safe, effective and predictable surgical options for treating myopia. However, dry eye symptoms and loss of corneal sensitivity may occur less frequently after SMILE than after FS-LASIK.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures






Similar articles
-
Laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) versus laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for correcting myopia.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 15;2(2):CD011080. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011080.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28197998 Free PMC article.
-
[Comparison of visual outcomes between corneal topography-guided FS-LASIK and SMILE for myopia and myopic astigmatism: a network meta-analysis].Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2024 Dec 11;60(12):1004-1012. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112142-20240108-00014. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2024. PMID: 39648029 Chinese.
-
Clinical Outcomes of SMILE and FS-LASIK Used to Treat Myopia: A Meta-analysis.J Refract Surg. 2016 Apr;32(4):256-65. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20151111-06. J Refract Surg. 2016. PMID: 27070233
-
Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) Versus Laser Assisted Stromal In Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) for Astigmatism Corrections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Am J Ophthalmol. 2023 Mar;247:181-199. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2022.11.013. Epub 2022 Nov 19. Am J Ophthalmol. 2023. PMID: 36410469
-
How Effective is Keratorefractive Lenticule Extraction Surgery (KLEx) in Reducing Dry Eye Outcomes Compared to LASIK?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.J Refract Surg. 2025 Aug;41(8):e839-e854. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20250506-07. Epub 2025 Aug 1. J Refract Surg. 2025. PMID: 40778870 Review.
Cited by
-
Refractive outcomes of small lenticule extraction (SMILE) Pro® with a 2 MHz femtosecond laser.Int Ophthalmol. 2024 Feb 10;44(1):52. doi: 10.1007/s10792-024-02915-2. Int Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38340212 Free PMC article.
-
One year refractive outcomes of Femtosecond-LASIK in mild, moderate and high myopia.Rom J Ophthalmol. 2017 Jan-Mar;61(1):23-31. doi: 10.22336/rjo.2017.5. Rom J Ophthalmol. 2017. PMID: 29450367 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction versus femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for myopia: a Meta-analysis.Int J Ophthalmol. 2017 Sep 18;10(9):1436-1445. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2017.09.17. eCollection 2017. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017. PMID: 28944205 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of early changes in ocular surface markers and tear inflammatory mediators after femtosecond lenticule extraction and FS-LASIK.Int J Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb 18;14(2):283-291. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2021.02.16. eCollection 2021. Int J Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 33614459 Free PMC article.
-
Intensive topical steroid regimen for enhanced very early recovery after small incision lenticule extraction.Int Ophthalmol. 2023 Nov;43(11):4097-4103. doi: 10.1007/s10792-023-02827-7. Epub 2023 Aug 10. Int Ophthalmol. 2023. PMID: 37561251 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
References
-
- Sandoval HP, de Castro LE, Vroman DT, Solomon KD. Refractive surgery survey 2004. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:221–33. - PubMed
-
- Chen S, Feng Y, Stojanovic A, Jankov MR II, Wang Q. Intralase femtosecond laser vs mechanical microkeratomes in LASIK for myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Refract Surg. 2011;28:15–24. - PubMed
-
- Sugar A. Ultrafast (femtosecond) laser refractive surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2002;13:246–9. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous