Comparison of Two Cap Thickness in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction: 100μm versus 160μm

PURPOSE: To compare the changes of biomechanical properties, endothelial cell density (ECD), and posterior corneal elevation (PCE) after femtosecond small incision lenticule extractions (SMILEs) with 100μm versus 160μm cap thicknesses. METHODS: A total of 12 rabbits were randomly assigned into two groups of 6 each. SMILE was performed at a depth of either 160μm (160-cap group) or 100μm (100-cap group). Corneal biomechanics, PCE, ECD were evaluated pre-operatively, 1week, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, and 4 months post-operatively by Pentacam, Corvis ST, in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) respectively. The Young’s modulus was obtained by strip-extensometry test 4 months after surgery. RESULTS: At each time point, the second applanation time (A2T) was similar between the groups with the exception of 4 months after surgery (22.66±0.16 ms in the 160-cap group versus 21.75±0.29 ms in the 100-cap group, p = 0.004). Neither deformation amplitude (DA) nor the first applanationtime (A1T) were significantly different between the two groups. The postoperative posterior surface did not shift forward, the changes of PCE and ECD were not significantly different between the two groups at any observation time. Young’s modulus was higher in the 160-cap group than that in the 100-cap group with no statistical significance (P>0.05). Regression analyses showed that the PCE changes and Young’s modulus were not affected by cap thickness (CT) or residual stromal bed thickness (RBT) (All P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The differences of corneal biomechanics, posterior surface elevation, or ECD changes were quite small when using 100μm or 160μm cap thicknesses in SMILE.