Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 18;15(3):502-509.
doi: 10.18240/ijo.2022.03.20. eCollection 2022.

Comparative study of objective visual quality between FS-LASIK and SMART in myopia

Yuan Wu  1   2   3 , Yue Huang  1   2   3 , Shu-Han Wang  1   2   3 , Gui-Qin Wang  3 , Ao-Miao Yu  3 , Shao-Zhen Zhao  1   2   3 , Rui-Hua Wei  1   2   3 , Rui-Bo Yang  1   2   3 , Chen Zhang  1   2   3
Affiliations

Comparative study of objective visual quality between FS-LASIK and SMART in myopia

Yuan Wu et al. Int J Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Aim: To compare the changes in the objective visual quality of patients with low and moderate myopia postoperatively after transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy using the smart pulse technology (SMART) and femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK).

Methods: Corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs), horizontal coma, vertical coma and spherical aberration were measured using Pentacam, and cutoff for modulation transfer function (MTF cutoff), objective scatter index (OSI) and Strehl ratio (SR) was measured using an optical quality analysis system (OQAS-II), before and after operation at 1, 3, and 6mo, and data were analyzed by repeated measurement two-way analysis of variance.

Results: The difference in uncorrected distance visual acuity between SMART and FS-LASIK was statistically significant only 1wk postoperatively. Approximately 86.36% and 80.69% of patients with spherical equivalent (SE) in ±0.50 D were observed in the SMART and FS-LASIK groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in SE between the two groups (P=0.509). The HOAs increased postoperatively compared with those before surgery in both groups (P<0.05). No significant difference in HOA, corneal horizontal coma, spherical aberration, ΔHOA, Δhorizontal coma, and Δspherical aberration were observed between the two group (P>0.05). Corneal vertical coma and Δcorneal vertical coma in the FS-LASIK group were higher than those in the SMART group (P<0.05). The OSI of both groups at 1mo after surgery was higher than that before surgery (P<0.05). At 3 and 6mo postoperatively, the OSI in the FS-LASIK group was slightly higher than that in the SMART group (P=0.040 and 0.047, respectively). At 6mo after surgery, the MTF cutoff was statistically significant different between the two groups (P=0.026). No significant difference in SR between the FS-LASIK and SMART groups was observed at 1, 3, and 6mo postoperatively (P>0.05).

Conclusion: The HOAs increase and visual quality is delayed in both groups postoperatively, and the long-term objective visual quality after SMART is slightly better than that after FS-LASIK.

Keywords: FS-LASIK; higher-order aberrations; myopia; smart pulse technology; visual quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visual acuity recovery after the operation between the FS-LASIK and SMART groups
ns: Not significant. aP<0.001 indicates a significant difference.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison between the FS-LASIK and SMART groups at 6mo
A: Postoperative spherical; B: Preoperative and postoperative refractive astigmatism; C: SE refractive accuracy at 6mo; D: SE attempted versus achieved in FS-LASIK group; E: SE attempted versus achieved in SMART group.
Figure 3
Figure 3. HOAs in the FS-LASIK and SMART groups
A: Preoperative and postoperative mean root mean square of HOA; B: Absolute changes in HOAs value in each individual Zernike coefficient; C: Mean of individual Zernike coefficient in the FS-LASIK group; D: Mean of individual Zernike coefficient in SMART group.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Řeháková T, Veliká V, Jirásková N. Correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism by femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis. Cesk Slov Oftalmol. 2019;75(2):65–71. - PubMed
    1. Xi L, Zhang C, He YL. Single-step transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in the treatment of mild, moderate, and high myopia: six month results. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(1):209. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fan-Paul NI, Li J, Miller JS, Florakis GJ. Night vision disturbances after corneal refractive surgery. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002;47(6):533–546. - PubMed
    1. Hersh PS, Steinert RF, Brint SF. Photorefractive keratectomy versus laser in situ keratomileusis: comparison of optical side effects. Summit PRK-LASIK Study Group. Ophthalmology. 2000;107(5):925–933. - PubMed
    1. Lorente-Velázquez A, Nieto-Bona A, Collar CV, Mesa AG. Straylight and contrast sensitivity after corneal refractive therapy. Optom Vis Sci. 2011;88(10):1245–1251. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources