SMILE矫正低中度近视与高度近视的效果对比
Comparison of the Effects of SMILE in Correcting Low Myopia, Medium Myopia and High Myopia
摘要: 目的:比较低中高度近视SMILE术后不同时间点的视力与屈光度变化。方法:回顾性研究,选择了2021年12月至2022年12月在青岛大学附属医院进行SMILE手术的患者,将纳入患者按等效球镜分为低中高度近视组,在术后完成1 d、1 wk、1 mo、3 mo的随访检查,观察患者各项数据变化情况。结果:患者术后各时点裸眼视力、等效球镜、球镜度数、柱镜度数均优于术前。术后裸眼视力比较:术后1 w低度近视组与高度近视组的差异有统计学意义(p = 0.004);低、中度近视组术后1 d与1 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05);术后等效球镜比较:术后3 mo低度近视组与高度近视组的差异有统计学意义(p = 0.004);高度近视组术后1 d与3 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05);术后球镜比较:高度近视组术后1 d与3 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05);术后柱镜比较:术后1 d低度近视组与中度近视组的差异有统计学意义(p = 0.009);术后1 mo低度近视组与中、高度近视组差异有统计学意义(对应p = 0.011,p < 0.001),术后3 mo低度近视组与中、高度近视组差异有统计学意义(对应p = 0.001,p < 0.001)。术后3 mo,裸眼视力 ≥ 1.0,三组占比均 > 90%,柱镜 ≤ |0.25| D,三组占比均高于术前。结论:三组患者术后裸眼视力明显提高,散光仍存在矫正不足。
Abstract: Objective: To compare the visual acuity and refraction at different times after SMILE for low to moderate to high myopia. Method: Retrospective study. We selected patients who underwent SMILE surgery at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from December 2021 to December 2022. All patients were divided into low myopia group, medium myopia group and high myopia group ac-cording to their equivalent spherical diameter, follow-up examinations will be completed at 1st day, 1st week, 1st month and 3rd mont after surgery to observe the changes in various data of the pa-tients. Result: The postoperative uncorrected visual acuity, spherical equivalent, spherical diopter, and cylinder diopter were all better than preoperative. Comparison of uncorrected visual acuity: there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.004) between the low myopia group and the high myopia group after 1st day of surgery; there was a statistically significant difference between the low and medium myopia groups at 1st day and 1st week after surgery (p < 0.05); comparison of spherical equivalent: there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.004) between the low myopia group and the high myopia group 3rd month after surgery; there was a statistically signifi-cant difference (p < 0.05) between 1st day with 3rd month after surgery in the high myopia group; comparison of spherical diopter: there was a statistically significant difference between the high myopia group at 1st day with 3rd month after surgery (p < 0.05); comparison of cylinder diopter: there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.009) between the low myopia group and the medium myopia group 1st day after surgery; there was a statistically significant difference between the low myopia group and the medium and high myopia groups 1st month after surgery (corre-sponding to p = 0.011, p < 0.001), and a statistically significant difference between the low myopia group and the medium and high myopia groups 3rd month after surgery (corresponding to p = 0.001, p < 0.001). After 3 months of surgery, uncorrected visual acuity was ≥ 1.0, and the proportion of all three groups was > 90%, cylinder diopter ≤ |0.25| D, and the proportion of the three groups was higher than before surgery. Conclusion: The postoperative uncorrected visual acuity of the three groups of patients has significantly improved, and there is still insufficient correction for astigmatism.
文章引用:宫前前, 姜涛, 赵丽华, 侯晓菲, 杨翠丽. SMILE矫正低中度近视与高度近视的效果对比[J]. 临床医学进展, 2024, 14(3): 1199-1207. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2024.143829

1. 引言

近视是指眼睛在放松状态下,平行光线进入眼内在视网膜之前聚焦,致使视网膜上不能清晰成像。有研究表明全球近视患病率正在逐渐上升 [1] ,近视可以通过光学镜片矫正、药物干预矫正、手术矫正 [2] 。光学镜片矫正顾名思义为佩戴镜片矫正近视,包括传统眼镜、角膜接触镜、角膜塑形镜等。药物干预大多使用低浓度阿托品滴眼液,有1项为期2年的研究表明低浓度阿托品可减轻儿童近视的进展,安慰剂治疗的对照眼近视的平均进展为−1.20 ± 0.69 D、眼轴平均增长0.38 ± 0.38 mm,而在阿托品治疗的眼睛中,近视进展仅为−0.28 ± 0.92 D,而眼轴长度基本保持不变 [3] ,但还未进入我国临床使用。飞秒激光小切口角膜基质透镜取出术(small incision lenticule extraction, SMILE)自诞生以来,以术后第1天视力明显提高且术后舒适度好,在屈光不正的患者中闻名。SMILE使用激光创造角膜基质透镜,从周边2 mm小切口取出。本文旨在研究不同程度的近视患者SMILE术后短期内的裸眼视力(uncorrected visual acuity, UCVA)、等效球镜(spherical equivalent, SE)、球镜(spherical diopter, DS)、柱镜(cylinder diopter, DC)的变化。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

本文为回顾性研究,选择了2021年12月至2022年12月在我院进行SMILE手术的患者,按纳入标准和排除标准筛选出共155人155眼(所有患者选择右眼录入)。这项研究符合赫尔辛基宣言。在全面说明SMILE可能存在的风险、随访检查的内容和时间点后,获得患者知情同意书。

纳入标准为:(1) 年龄范围:18~40岁;(2) 角膜正常,无角膜混浊、圆锥角膜;(3) 屈光度应在手术前至少2年保持稳定,术前1周停止使用软性角膜接触镜,术前1个月停止使用角膜塑形镜;(4) 估计术后角膜基质层厚度 > 280 μm;(5) 术前最佳矫正视力(best corrected visual acuity, BCVA) ≥ 1.0;(6) 无其他眼科疾病或手术史;(7) 无心理病史。

排除标准为:(1) 白内障、青光眼、角膜异常和眼底异常病史;(2) 眼科手术史;(3) 瞳孔异常,包括瞳孔超大(瞳孔直径 > 4.5 mm)、虹膜后粘连;(4) 全身性疾病史,包括糖尿病、高血压、全身性自身免疫性疾病和严重贫血等;(5) 不能耐受手术者;(6) 对手术有不切实际期望者。

2.2. 方法

所有患者都接受了标准严格的术前检查,包括电脑验光、睫状肌麻痹验光、UCVA和BCVA测量、非接触性眼压计测量眼压、干眼相关检查、角膜地形图、裂隙灯评估和眼底检查。要求患者术前1周开始使用妥布霉素滴眼液,每天4次,每次1滴,直至手术。

所有手术均由同一位眼科医生在同一无菌手术室按照标准既定程序进行。室内温度和湿度是固定的,并由恒定控温系统控制。SMILE手术在局部麻醉下使用VisualMax飞秒激光系统(德国蔡司医疗公司)进行的,启动负压吸引后,首先于角膜基质层进行2次不同深度扫描,手术参数为固定值,包括脉冲能量为135 nJ,角膜帽厚度为120 μm,帽直径为7.5 mm,透镜直径为6.5 mm,然后创造12点钟位置的侧切口,长度为2 mm,通过侧切口取出基质层微透镜。要求患者在整个过程中盯着绿色闪烁指示灯。

2.3. 术后用药及随访

术后要求患者使用妥布霉素滴眼液、0.1%氟米龙滴眼液每天4次,每次1滴,持续2周后,使用次数每周递减一次,使用0.1%玻璃酸钠滴眼液每天4次,每次1滴,3月后停止使用。术后安排患者进行1 d、1 w、1 mo和3 mo的常规访视,检查屈光度及视力。

2.4. 统计学方法

采用SPSS 27.0进行数据的处理与分析。计量资料采用Shapiro-Wilk检验数据是否符合正态分布。三组患者计量资料不符合正态分布者采用中位数(第一四分位数,第三四分位数)表示,三组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis检验,组内术前术后对比采用Friedman检验,进一步两两比较采用Bonferroni法。以p < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

共纳入155人155眼,其中男77人77眼,女78人78眼。所有患者按SE分为低度近视组:度数范围为50度~300度(−0.50 D ≤ SE ≤ −3.00 D),51例51眼;中度近视组:度数范围为300度~600度(−3.00 D < SE ≤ −6.00 D),52例52眼;高度近视组:度数范围为高于600度(SE > −6.00 D),52例52眼。本研究入组的所有患者均顺利完成手术,术中术后未发生并发症。

三组患者的术前临床资料见表1,其中年龄、术前DC比较,差异无统计学意义;术前UCVA、SE、DS比较,差异有统计学意义,见表1。术后临床资料见表2

Table 1. Preoperative clinical data of three groups of patients

表1. 三组患者的术前临床资料

注:p < 0.05 数据差异有统计学意义。

Table 2. Postoperative clinical data of three groups of patients

表2. 三组患者的术后临床资料

3.1. 三组患者的术后UCVA比较

三组患者术后1 d、1 mo、3 mo比较,差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05);术后1 w比较,差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),其中,低度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.004),低度近视组与中度近视组、中度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异无统计学意义(对应p = 0.129,p = 0.683),见表3。三组患者组内按时间顺序比较,术后1 d、1 w、1 mo、3 mo与术前差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),术后1 d与术后1 mo、3 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),低、中度近视组术后1 d与1 w差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),余差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05),见表4。术前至术后3 mo,UCVA (LogMar) ≤ 0,即UCVA ≥ 1.0的三组占比见图1

3.2. 三组患者的术后SE比较

三组患者术后1 d、1 w、1 mo比较,差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05);术后3 mo比较,差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),其中,低度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.004),低度近视组与中度近视组、中度近视组与高度近视组比较差异无统计学意义(对应p = 0.197,p = 0.525),见表3。三组患者组内按时间顺序比较,术后1 d、1 w、1 mo、3 mo与术前差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),高度近视组术后1 d与术后3 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),余差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05),见表4

3.3. 三组患者的术后DS比较

三组患者术后1 d、1 w、1 mo、3 mo比较,差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05),见表3。三组患者组内按时间顺序比较,术后1 d、1 w、1 mo、3 mo与术前差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),高度近视组术后1 d与术后3 mo差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),余差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05),见表4

3.4. 三组患者的术后DC比较

Figure 1. The proportion of UCVA (LogMar) ≤ 0 at different time points

图1. 各时间点UCVA (LogMar) ≤ 0所占比

三组患者术后1 w比较,差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05);术后1 d、1 mo、3 mo比较,差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),其中,术后1 d,低度近视组与中度近视组比较,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.009),低度近视组、中度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异无统计学意义(对应p = 0.123,p = 0.279);术后1 mo,低度近视组与中度近视组、高度近视组比较,差异有统计学意义(对应p = 0.011,p < 0.001),中度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.241);术后3 mo,低度近视组与中度近视组、高度近视组比较,差异有统计学意义(对应p = 0.001,p < 0.001),中度近视组与高度近视组比较,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.648),见表3。三组患者组内按时间顺序比较,术后1 d、1 w、1 mo、3 mo与术前差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05),余差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05),见表4。术前至术后3 mo,DC ≤ |0.25| D,三组占比见图2

Table 3. Comparison of postoperative p-values among three groups

表3. 修改为 三组术后各时间点p值比较

注:p < 0.05数据差异有统计学意义;a:低度近视组与高度近视组差异有统计学意义;b:低度近视组与中度近视组差异有统计学意义。

Figure 2. The proportion of DC located at [−0.25 D, 0.25 D] at different time points

图2. 各时间点DC位于[−0.25 D, 0.25 D]所占比

Table 4. Comparison of p-values at preoperative and postoperative time points within three groups

表4. 三组组内术前术后时间点p值比较

续表

注:p < 0.05数据差异有统计学意义。

4. 讨论

一项手术最重要的除了术后效果,还有安全性、有效性,既往研究表明SMILE无论是对低度近视还是中高度近视都是安全的有效的 [4] [5] [6] [7] ,且SMILE不产生角膜瓣,对角膜生物力学影响最小 [8] ,最低程度地降低了对角膜强度的影响 [9] ;可以保留更多的角膜神经纤维 [10] ,对角膜基底神经丛的损伤最小、术后恢复更快 [11] ,从而降低患者术后不适、干眼症的风险 [12] ,同时也降低了术后角膜细胞损伤、术后炎症的风险 [13] 。

屈光术后短期内角膜水肿是常见体征之一 [14] ,术后1 w低度近视组与高度近视组相比,更多患者的UCVA达到1.0或者更好,这可能与术后1 w中低度患者调节功能上升,高度近视患者调节功能不变或下降有关,虽然调节功能下降,但在1 mo时会回升 [15] 。三组患者UCVA随时间增加不明显,至术后1 mo,90%以上的患者达到UCVA ≥ 1.0,与术后1 d相比UCVA的增加,考虑与SMILE术后1 mo角膜中央水肿基本消退,基质层间间隙基本贴合有关 [16] 。

Rupal Shah研究了SMILE术后SE的变化情况,结果为SE在术后第1个月左右保持稳定,第3月、第6月无明显变化 [17] ,这与本研究术后3 mo低度近视组和高度近视组SE有差异不同,可能因为她的研究纳入高度近视患者人数远低于中低度近视患者导致偏差有关,也可能与高度近视患者术后度数回退有关 [18] 。本研究中的三组患者随时间顺序比较,SE无明显差异,但高度近视的患者术后1 d与术后3 mo比较SE有差异,说明SMILE术后中低度近视患者SE较高度近视患者更稳定,高度近视患者术后度数有少量回退,回退变化不明显。有5年研究显示高度近视患者SMILE术后SE的回退在术后5年差异显著,但是回退是始于术后早期的,这种变化是缓慢的,这与我们的研究结果相似 [19] 。Sri Ganesh的研究结果表明在3个月时角膜中央上皮厚度平均增加5.1 ± 2.2 µm,角膜上皮增厚与近视度数呈正相关,这也侧面揭示了高度近视患者术后1 d与术后3 mo比较SE有统计学意义的原因 [20] 。

我们在临床上观察到,大部分患者除了近视,还伴有不同程度的散光,故研究SMILE治疗近视的效果,就不可避免要讨论SMILE对散光的矫正。本研究以SE分组,未对术前DC进行独立分组研究,仅2例患者术前DC ≤ −2.5 D (高度散光),但三组患者术前DC差异无统计学意义。三组患者术后DC均较术前减小,但至术后3 mo并未完全矫正,术后3个月内随时间变化无明显差别,这与Anders Ivarsen的研究结果相吻合,即低度散光SMILE术后仍存在矫正不足 [21] 。Scott A. Read总结既往散光对视力影响的研究得出随着柱镜屈光度的增加,无论近视力还是远视力都近似线性下降,即散光度数越高,视力下降的幅度越大 [22] 。有研究表明散光导致视力模糊的平均极限为±0.28 ± 0.12 D (均值 ± 标准差) [23] ,故我们认为术后散光度数在±0.25 D内,对术后UCVA的影响不大。我们计算了SMILE术后3个月内各时间点散光度数在±0.25 D范围内的占比,可以发现术后柱镜虽仍存在度数,但±0.25 D内占比较术前大幅度提高,至术后3 mo,低度近视组DC占比 ± 0.25 D内可达到80%,中高度近视组也可达到50%以上,故我们得出SMILE术后DC对UCVA的影响较术前明显降低的结论。

针对SMILE术后散光,Anders Gyldenkerne对术前没有主观散光的患者行SMILE术矫正,将术前的客观散光与术后3 mo的主观散光进行比较,得出术前散光的客观测量结果通常不能直接指示术后的主观散光情况,但术前客观散光 > |0.50| D会使术后主观散光 > |0.50| D的风险增加的结论 [24] 。Chen研究了术前各种类型散光的患者,结果表明术前较高的ORA (Ocular residual astigmatism,眼内散光)与SMILE术后散光矫正不足有关 [25] 。故我们认为SMILE术后散光矫正不足,与术前散光度数较高、ORA过大相关。

有研究表明SMILE术后会增加高阶像差(Higher order aberrations, HOAs) [26] ,这会导致SMILE术后一些并发症,如眩光、光晕和夜视能力差等。但一项Mate分析显示,SMILE和非SMILE手术术后均会导致HOAs增加,且HOAs的增加程度相当 [27] 。随着时间流逝,这些视觉症状会减轻 [28] [29] ,这可能和大脑能够补偿与光学相关的感觉损失有关 [30] 。

5. 总结

综上所述,SMILE是安全有效的,高度近视患者等效球镜术后稍回退,但与低度近视、中度近视患者术后裸眼视力无明显差异;三组患者术后仍存在散光矫正不足,但对裸眼视力的影响明显降低。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Holden, B.A., Fricke, T.R., Wilson, D.A., Jong, M., Naidoo, K.S., Sankaridurg, P., Wong, T.Y., Naduvilath, T.J. and Resnikoff, S. (2016) Global Prevalence of Myopia and High Myopia and Temporal Trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology, 123, 1036-1042.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.006
[2] Baird, P.N., Saw, S.M., Lanca, C., Guggenheim, J.A., Smith Iii E.L., Zhou, X., Matsui, K.O., Wu, P.C., Sankaridurg, P., Chia, A., et al. (2020) Myopia. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 6, Article No. 99.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-020-00231-4
[3] Chua, W.H., Balakrishnan, V., Chan, Y.H., Tong, L., Ling, Y., Quah, B.L. and Tan, D. (2006) Atropine for the Treatment of Childhood Myopia. Ophthalmology, 113, 2285-2291.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.05.062
[4] Chansue, E., Tanehsakdi, M., Swasdibutra, S. and McAlinden, C. (2015) Efficacy, Predictability and Safety of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE). Eye and Vision, 2, Article No. 14.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40662-015-0024-4
[5] Vestergaard, A.H., Grauslund, J., Ivarsen, A.R. and Hjortdal, J. (2014) Efficacy, Safety, Predictability, Contrast Sensitivity, and Aberrations after Femtosecond Laser Lenticule Extrac-tion. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 40, 403-411.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.07.053
[6] Xia, F., Shen, Y., Han, T., Zhao, J., Xu, H. and Zhou, X. (2020) Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) for Moderate and High Myopia: Seven-Year Outcomes of Refraction, Corneal Tomography, and Wavefront Aberrations. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2020, Article ID: 3825864.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3825864
[7] Fu, M., Li, M., Wei, R., Zhang, C., Huang, Y., Niu, L., Wang, X., Zhang, H. and Zhou, X. (2022) Long-Term Visual Quality after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) and Laser Assisted Subepithelial Keratomileusis (LASEK) for Low Myopia. BMC Oph-thalmology, 22, Article No. 347.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02568-8
[8] Guo, H., Hosseini-Moghaddam, S.M. and Hodge, W. (2019) Corneal Biomechanical Properties after SMILE versus FLEX, LASIK, LASEK, or PRK: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMC Ophthalmology, 19, Article No. 167.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-019-1165-3
[9] Dan, Z, Reinstein Timothy, J. and Archer Randleman, J.B. (2013) Mathematical Model to Compare the Relative Tensile Strength of the Cornea after PRK, LASIK, and Small Incision Len-ticule Extraction. Journal of Refractive Surgery, 29, 454-460.
https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20130617-03
[10] 杨颖, 左晶, 张传伟, 李凯, 王育良. 不同角膜屈光手术对基底膜下神经的影响[J]. 国际眼科杂志, 2015, 15(8): 1429-1431.
[11] Mohamed-Noriega, K., Riau, A.K., Lwin, N.C., Chaurasia, S.S., Tan, D.T. and Mehta, J.S. (2014) Early Corneal Nerve Damage and Recovery following Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) and Laser in Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK). Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science, 55, 1823-1834.
https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-13324
[12] Wong, A.H.Y., Cheung, R.K.Y., Kua, W.N., Shih, K.C., Chan, T.C.Y. and Wan, K.H. (2019) Dry Eyes after SMILE. Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology, 8, 397-405.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.APO.0000580136.80338.d0
[13] Dong, Z., Zhou, X., Wu, J., Zhang, Z., Li, T., Zhou, Z., Zhang, S. and Li, G. (2014) Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) and Femtosecond Laser LASIK: Compari-son of Corneal Wound Healing and Inflammation. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 98, 263-269.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-303415
[14] Liu, T., Dan, T. and Luo, Y. (2017) Small Incision Lenti-cule Extraction for Correction of Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism: First 24-Hour Outcomes. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2017, Article ID: 5824534.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5824534
[15] 向爱群, 杜凯旋, 吴小影, 尹叶薇, 傅艳燕, 卢颖, 傅秋满, 胡涂, 李元君, 文丹. 高度近视SMILE和FS-LASIK术后早期局部调节和中枢视感知觉功能变化[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2021, 23(8): 561-569.
[16] 董子献, 何丽, 孙周延, 沈阳, 褚仁远, 周行涛. 飞秒激光小切口角膜基质透镜取出术后兔角膜组织学观察[J]. 中华眼科杂志, 2016, 52(7): 507-513.
[17] Shah, R., Shah, S. and Sengupta, S. (2011) Results of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction: All-in-One Femtosecond Laser Refractive Surgery. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 37, 127-137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.033
[18] 高晶, 孙熠, 温誗, 裴澄. 中高度近视患者LASIK术后屈光回退的临床分析[J]. 国际眼科杂志, 2019, 19(4): 614-618.
[19] Ağca, A., Çakır, İ., Tülü Aygün, B., Yaşa, D., Yıldırım, Y., Yıldız, B.K. and Demirok, A. (2018) Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction in High Myopia: 5-Year Results. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2018, Article ID: 5893126.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5893126
[20] Ganesh, S., Brar, S. and Relekar, K.J. (2016) Epithelial Thickness Pro-file Changes Following Small Incision Refractive Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) for Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism. Journal of Refractive Surgery, 32, 473-482.
https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20160512-01
[21] Ivarsen, A. and Hjortdal, J. (2014) Correction of Myopic Astigmatism with Small Incision Lenticule Extraction. Journal of Refractive Surgery, 30, 240-247.
https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20140320-02
[22] Read, S.A., Vincent, S.J. and Collins, M.J. (2014) The Vis-ual and Functional Impacts of Astigmatism and Its Clinical Management. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 34, 267-294.
https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12128
[23] Guo, H.Q. and Atchison, D. (2010) Subjective Blur Limits for Cylinder. Optometry and Vision Science, 87, E549-E559.
https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181e61b8f
[24] Gyldenkerne, A., Hjortdal, J. and Ivarsen, A. (2020) Astig-matism Prediction in Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 46, 524-533.
https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000083
[25] Chen, D., Zhao, X., Chou, Y. and Luo, Y. (2022) Compar-ison of Visual Outcomes and Optical Quality of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted SMILE and Visian Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL V4c) Implantation for Moderate to High Myopia: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Refractive Surgery, 38, 332-338.
https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20220411-01
[26] Jin, H.Y., Wan, T., Wu, F. and Yao, K. (2017) Comparison of Visual Results and Higher-Order Aberrations after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE): High Myopia vs. Mild to Moderate Myopia. BMC Ophthalmology, 17, Article No. 118.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-017-0507-2
[27] Cui, G., Di, Y., Yang, S., Chen, D. and Li, Y. (2023) Efficacy of Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery in High Astigmatism: A Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Medicine, 9, Article 1100241.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1100241
[28] Eydelman, M., Hilmantel, G., Tarver, M.E., Hofmeister, E.M., May, J., Hammel, K., Hays, R.D. and Ferris, F. (2017) Symptoms and Satisfaction of Patients in the Pa-tient-Reported Outcomes with Laser in Situ Keratomileusis (PROWL) Studies. JAMA Ophthalmology, 135, 13-22.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.4587
[29] Ivarsen, A., Asp, S. and Hjortdal, J. (2014) Safety and Complications of More than 1500 Small-Incision Lenticule Extraction Procedures. Ophthalmology, 121, 822-828.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.11.006
[30] Barbot, A., Park, W.J., Ng, C.J., Zhang, R.Y., Huxlin, K.R., Ta-din, D. and Yoon, G. (2021) Functional Reallocation of Sensory Processing Resources Caused by Long-Term Neural Adaptation to Altered Optics. eLife, 10, e58734.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58734