Cargando…

Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia

PURPOSE: To investigate the 2-year visual quality of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for the correction of low myopia. METHODS: In this prospective study, we included 25 eyes of 25 patients (7 men) who underwent EVO-ICL and 36 eyes of 36...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fu, Mengjun, Li, Meiyan, Xian, Yiyong, Yu, Zhiqiang, Zhang, Haorun, Choi, Joanne, Niu, Lingling, Wang, Xiaoying, Zhou, Xingtao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9043127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35492322
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.780000
_version_ 1784694811686600704
author Fu, Mengjun
Li, Meiyan
Xian, Yiyong
Yu, Zhiqiang
Zhang, Haorun
Choi, Joanne
Niu, Lingling
Wang, Xiaoying
Zhou, Xingtao
author_facet Fu, Mengjun
Li, Meiyan
Xian, Yiyong
Yu, Zhiqiang
Zhang, Haorun
Choi, Joanne
Niu, Lingling
Wang, Xiaoying
Zhou, Xingtao
author_sort Fu, Mengjun
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate the 2-year visual quality of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for the correction of low myopia. METHODS: In this prospective study, we included 25 eyes of 25 patients (7 men) who underwent EVO-ICL and 36 eyes of 36 patients (16 men) who underwent SMILE between January 2018 and December 2018. Subjective and objective visual outcomes were compared between ICL and SMILE. All patients were followed for 2 years. RESULTS: At the postoperative 2-year visit, the percentage of patients with uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) greater than or equal to preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was comparable in the ICL group (80%, 20/25) and SMILE group (88.89%, 32/36). Spherical equivalent (SE) was within ± 0.50 D in 96% (24/25) of the ICL group and 94.44% (34/36) of the SMILE group. No eyes lost more than 2 lines of CDVA. Postoperative high-order aberrations (HOAs) were significantly increased in the ICL group (p < 0.01) and in the SMILE group (p < 0.01). The most common visual complaint was halo after ICL and starburst after SMILE. There was no correlation between HOAs and visual complaints (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens provides comparable safety, efficacy, long-term visual stability, and high patient satisfaction when compared to SMILE in correcting low myopia. EVO-ICL could be a favorable alternative for low myopia. KEY MESSAGES WHAT WAS KNOWN? • Visual outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) versus small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of mild myopia remain unclear. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS? • Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) provides comparable safety, efficacy, long-term visual stability, and high patient satisfaction when compared to small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in correcting low myopia. • The most common visual complaint was halo after ICL and starburst after SMILE.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9043127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90431272022-04-28 Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia Fu, Mengjun Li, Meiyan Xian, Yiyong Yu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Haorun Choi, Joanne Niu, Lingling Wang, Xiaoying Zhou, Xingtao Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine PURPOSE: To investigate the 2-year visual quality of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for the correction of low myopia. METHODS: In this prospective study, we included 25 eyes of 25 patients (7 men) who underwent EVO-ICL and 36 eyes of 36 patients (16 men) who underwent SMILE between January 2018 and December 2018. Subjective and objective visual outcomes were compared between ICL and SMILE. All patients were followed for 2 years. RESULTS: At the postoperative 2-year visit, the percentage of patients with uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) greater than or equal to preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was comparable in the ICL group (80%, 20/25) and SMILE group (88.89%, 32/36). Spherical equivalent (SE) was within ± 0.50 D in 96% (24/25) of the ICL group and 94.44% (34/36) of the SMILE group. No eyes lost more than 2 lines of CDVA. Postoperative high-order aberrations (HOAs) were significantly increased in the ICL group (p < 0.01) and in the SMILE group (p < 0.01). The most common visual complaint was halo after ICL and starburst after SMILE. There was no correlation between HOAs and visual complaints (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens provides comparable safety, efficacy, long-term visual stability, and high patient satisfaction when compared to SMILE in correcting low myopia. EVO-ICL could be a favorable alternative for low myopia. KEY MESSAGES WHAT WAS KNOWN? • Visual outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) versus small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of mild myopia remain unclear. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS? • Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens (EVO-ICL) provides comparable safety, efficacy, long-term visual stability, and high patient satisfaction when compared to small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in correcting low myopia. • The most common visual complaint was halo after ICL and starburst after SMILE. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9043127/ /pubmed/35492322 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.780000 Text en Copyright © 2022 Fu, Li, Xian, Yu, Zhang, Choi, Niu, Wang and Zhou. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
Fu, Mengjun
Li, Meiyan
Xian, Yiyong
Yu, Zhiqiang
Zhang, Haorun
Choi, Joanne
Niu, Lingling
Wang, Xiaoying
Zhou, Xingtao
Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title_full Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title_fullStr Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title_full_unstemmed Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title_short Two-Year Visual Outcomes of Evolution Implantable Collamer Lens and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for the Correction of Low Myopia
title_sort two-year visual outcomes of evolution implantable collamer lens and small incision lenticule extraction for the correction of low myopia
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9043127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35492322
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.780000
work_keys_str_mv AT fumengjun twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT limeiyan twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT xianyiyong twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT yuzhiqiang twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT zhanghaorun twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT choijoanne twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT niulingling twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT wangxiaoying twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia
AT zhouxingtao twoyearvisualoutcomesofevolutionimplantablecollamerlensandsmallincisionlenticuleextractionforthecorrectionoflowmyopia