Cargando…

Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes

This review summarizes the current status of the small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedure. Following the early work by Sekundo et al. and Shah et al., SMILE has become increasingly popular. The accuracy of the creation of the lenticule with the VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Medi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reinstein, Dan Z, Archer, Timothy J, Gobbe, Marine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604118/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-014-0003-1
_version_ 1782395007383109632
author Reinstein, Dan Z
Archer, Timothy J
Gobbe, Marine
author_facet Reinstein, Dan Z
Archer, Timothy J
Gobbe, Marine
author_sort Reinstein, Dan Z
collection PubMed
description This review summarizes the current status of the small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedure. Following the early work by Sekundo et al. and Shah et al., SMILE has become increasingly popular. The accuracy of the creation of the lenticule with the VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec) has been verified using very high-frequency (VHF) digital ultrasound and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Visual and refractive outcomes have been shown to be similar to those achieved with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), notably in a large population reported by Hjortdal, Vestergaard et al. Safety in terms of the change in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) has also been shown to be similar to LASIK. It was expected that there would be less postoperative dry eye after SMILE compared to LASIK because the anterior stroma is disturbed only by the small incision, meaning that the anterior corneal nerves should be less affected. A number of studies have demonstrated a lower reduction and faster recovery of corneal sensation after SMILE than LASIK. Some studies have also used confocal microscopy to demonstrate a lower decrease in subbasal nerve fiber density after SMILE than LASIK. The potential biomechanical advantages of SMILE have been modeled by Reinstein et al. based on the non-linearity of tensile strength through the stroma. Studies have reported a similar change in Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert) parameters after SMILE and LASIK, however, these have previously been shown to be unreliable as a representation of corneal biomechanics. Retreatment options after SMILE are discussed. Tissue addition applications of the SMILE procedure are also discussed including the potential for cryo-preservation of the lenticule for later reimplantation (Mohamed-Noriega, Angunawela, Lim et al.), and a new procedure referred to as endokeratophakia in which a myopic SMILE lenticule is implanted into a hyperopic patient (Pradhan et al.). Finally, studies reporting microdistortions in Bowman’s layer and corneal wound healing responses are also described.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4604118
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46041182015-11-24 Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes Reinstein, Dan Z Archer, Timothy J Gobbe, Marine Eye Vis (Lond) Review This review summarizes the current status of the small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedure. Following the early work by Sekundo et al. and Shah et al., SMILE has become increasingly popular. The accuracy of the creation of the lenticule with the VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec) has been verified using very high-frequency (VHF) digital ultrasound and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Visual and refractive outcomes have been shown to be similar to those achieved with laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), notably in a large population reported by Hjortdal, Vestergaard et al. Safety in terms of the change in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) has also been shown to be similar to LASIK. It was expected that there would be less postoperative dry eye after SMILE compared to LASIK because the anterior stroma is disturbed only by the small incision, meaning that the anterior corneal nerves should be less affected. A number of studies have demonstrated a lower reduction and faster recovery of corneal sensation after SMILE than LASIK. Some studies have also used confocal microscopy to demonstrate a lower decrease in subbasal nerve fiber density after SMILE than LASIK. The potential biomechanical advantages of SMILE have been modeled by Reinstein et al. based on the non-linearity of tensile strength through the stroma. Studies have reported a similar change in Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert) parameters after SMILE and LASIK, however, these have previously been shown to be unreliable as a representation of corneal biomechanics. Retreatment options after SMILE are discussed. Tissue addition applications of the SMILE procedure are also discussed including the potential for cryo-preservation of the lenticule for later reimplantation (Mohamed-Noriega, Angunawela, Lim et al.), and a new procedure referred to as endokeratophakia in which a myopic SMILE lenticule is implanted into a hyperopic patient (Pradhan et al.). Finally, studies reporting microdistortions in Bowman’s layer and corneal wound healing responses are also described. BioMed Central 2014-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4604118/ /pubmed/26605350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-014-0003-1 Text en © Reinstein et al.; licensee BioMed Central 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review
Reinstein, Dan Z
Archer, Timothy J
Gobbe, Marine
Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title_full Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title_fullStr Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title_short Small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
title_sort small incision lenticule extraction (smile) history, fundamentals of a new refractive surgery technique and clinical outcomes
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604118/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-014-0003-1
work_keys_str_mv AT reinsteindanz smallincisionlenticuleextractionsmilehistoryfundamentalsofanewrefractivesurgerytechniqueandclinicaloutcomes
AT archertimothyj smallincisionlenticuleextractionsmilehistoryfundamentalsofanewrefractivesurgerytechniqueandclinicaloutcomes
AT gobbemarine smallincisionlenticuleextractionsmilehistoryfundamentalsofanewrefractivesurgerytechniqueandclinicaloutcomes