Page 90 - JSOM Winter 2024

TABLE 1 Baseline Characteristics by Type of Treatment
Treatment, mean (SD) P value*
LASIK PRK SMILE Overall LASIK vs. PRK LASIK vs. SMILE PRK vs. SMILE
Age 35.2 (9.0) 34.2 (8.1) 30.5 (6.6) <.001 .665 <.001 <.001
Sphere –3.43 (1.87) –3.06 (1.70) –3.05 (1.35) .123 .090 .369 1
Cylinder –0.79 (0.72) –0.63 (0.59) –.51 (.60) .002 .025 .005 .347
MSE –3.82 (1.86) –3.37 (1.70) –3.30 (1.33) .034 .028 .103 1
Pachymetry, µm 558 (29) 543 (37) 561 (28) <.001 <.001 1 <.001
Ablation depth/
lenticule thickness, µm 60.0 (22.0) 52.0 (22.0) 48.36 (20.2) <.001 .001 .002 .645
*P values for overall tests are based on chi-square or one-way ANOVA test. P values for pairwise comparisons are based on the post-hoc Bon-
ferroni method for the ANOVA test.
LASIK = laser in situ keratomileusis; PRK = photorefractive keratectomy; SMILE = small incision lenticule extraction; MSE = manifest spherical
equivalent.

TABLE 2 Preoperative and Postoperative UDVA and CDVA Measurements by Type of Treatment
Treatment, mean (SD)* P value †
LASIK PRK SMILE Overall LASIK vs. PRK LASIK vs. SMILE PRK vs. SMILE
UDVA (logMAR):
Preoperative 1.16 (.49) 1.12 (.52) 1.19 (.46) .717 1 1 .820
Postoperative –0.05 (.08) –0.07(.08) –0.06 (.10) .308 .052 .925 1
Postop vs preop ‡ P<.001 P<.001 P<.001
CDVA (logMAR):
Preoperative –0.10 (.05) –0.10 (.05) –0.10 (0.04) .916 1 1 1
Postoperative –0.11 (.06) –0.13 (.06) –0.10 (0.06) .124 .119 .371 .001
Postop vs. preop ‡ P=.010 P<.001 P=.935
*Unless otherwise specified.
†P values for overall tests are based on one-way ANOVA. P values for pairwise comparisons are based on the post-hoc Bonferroni method for
the ANOVA test.
‡P values for paired pre-post paired comparisons are based on t test.
LASIK = laser in situ keratomileusis; PRK = photorefractive keratectomy; SMILE = small incision lenticule extraction; UDVA = uncorrected
distance visual acuity; CDVA = corrected distance visual acuity.

FIGURE 1 Preoperative CDVA and 6-month postoperative UDVA by treatment.

The preoperative CDVA bar graph represents the overall visual potential with treatment. The 6-month postoperative UDVA bar graph depicts
the achieved unaided visual acuity after treatment. These data are used to calculate the efficacy index (a ratio of mean postoperative UDVA to
mean preoperative CDVA), which was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90–0.95) for LASIK, 0.95 (95% CI 0.94–0.96) for PRK, and 0.95 (95% CI 0.91–0.99)
for SMILE with no significant difference between groups (P=.204).
LASIK = laser in situ keratomileusis; PRK = photorefractive keratectomy; SMILE = small incision lenticule extraction; UDVA = uncorrected
distance visual acuity; CDVA = corrected distance visual acuity.

Supplemental Figure 1 highlights these symptoms experi- Discussion
enced by treatment type. Postoperative patient satisfaction
scores were not different between groups (P=.335). Out of PROs after refractive surgery give context to the efficacy and
25 (a higher score is better), the scores were: LASIK: 24.22 success of the treatment. The present study shows compara-
(SD 1.86); PRK: 23.88 (SD 2.87); and SMILE: 23.68 (SD ble PROs among LASIK, PRK, and SMILE patients 6 months
2.36). postoperatively.

88 | JSOM Volume 24, Edition 4 / Winter 2024