Top

International Ophthalmology

Published in:

01-10-2018 | Original Paper

Corneal thickness, residual stromal thickness, and its effect on opaque bubble layer in small-incision lenticule extraction

Authors: Jiaonan Ma, Yan Wang, Liuyang Li, Jiamei Zhang

Published in: International Ophthalmology | Issue 5/2018

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the effects of the central corneal thickness (CCT) and residual stromal thickness (RST) on the formation of opaque bubble layer (OBL) during small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE).

Methods

A total of 345 eyes from Refractive Surgery Center database at Tianjin Eye Hospital that had been subjected to SMILE surgery and followed for 6 months were included in this study and divided into OBL and OBL-free groups. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data for all eyes were evaluated and analyzed using multivariate regression analysis. After adjustment for several confounding factors, potential associations of CCT and RST with OBL were elucidated by determining odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

In total, 22 of the 345 eyes developed various degrees of OBL during the femtosecond laser scanning phase of SMILE surgery. After adjustment for age, sex, and refractive errors, significant relationships were detected between CCT and RST and OBL formation (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.02–1.06; OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.02–1.05, respectively, P < 0.001). Smooth curve fitting revealed an increased risk of OBL in the presence of an increased CCT or RST. However, visual outcomes were comparable between the two groups at both 3 and 6 months postoperatively.

Conclusions

The results suggest that OBL formation during SMILE surgery is more likely in eyes with a thicker cornea. CCT and RST can be considered independent risk factors for OBL formation. Although this phenomenon may disturb the surgical procedure, it is unlikely to affect the postoperative visual outcome.

Juhasz T, Loesel FH, Kurtz RM, Horvath C (1999) Corneal refractive surgery with femtosecond lasers. IEEE J Sel Top Quantum Electron 5:902–910CrossRef

Vestergaard AH, Grauslund J, Ivarsen AR, Hjortdal JØ (2014) Efficacy, safety, predictability, contrast sensitivity, and aberrations after femtosecond laser lenticule extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:403–411CrossRefPubMed

Tian H, Ke Z, Chen Y, Yang G, Li H, Zhou X (2016) Four-year observation of predictability and stability of small incision lenticule extraction. BMC Ophthalmol 16:149CrossRef

Zhang Y, Shen Q, Jia Y, Zhou D, Zhou J (2016) Clinical outcomes of smile and FS-LASIK used to treat myopia: a meta-analysis. J Refract Surg 32:256–265CrossRefPubMed

Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M (2013) Accuracy and reproducibility of cap thickness in small incision lenticule extraction. J Refract Surg 29:810–818CrossRefPubMed

Reinstein DZ, Gobbe M, Gobbe L, Archer TJ, Carp GI (2015) Optical zone centration accuracy using corneal fixation-based SMILE compared to eye tracker-based femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK for myopia. J Refract Surg 31:586–592CrossRefPubMed

Aristeidou A, Taniguchi EV, Tsatsos M, Muller R, Mcalinden C, Pineda R (2015) The evolution of corneal and refractive surgery with the femtosecond laser. Eye Vis 2:1–14CrossRef

Ratkay-Traub I, Ferincz IE, Juhasz T, Kurtz RM, Krueger RR (2003) First clinical results with the femtosecond neodynium-glass laser in refractive surgery. J Refract Surg 19:94–103PubMed

Luengo Gimeno F, Chan CM, Li L, Tan DT, Mehta JS (2011) Comparison of eye-tracking success in laser in situ keratomileusis after flap creation with 2 femtosecond laser models. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:538–543CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ide T, Yoo SH, Kymionis GD, Haft P, O’Brien TP (2009) Second femtosecond laser pass for incomplete laser in situ keratomileusis flaps caused by suction loss. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:153–157CrossRefPubMed

11.

Ide T, Kymionis GD, Goldman DA, Yoo SH, O’Brien TP (2008) Subconjunctival gas bubble Formation during LASIK flap creation using femtosecond laser. J Refract Surg 24:850–851PubMed

12.

Srinivasan S, Herzig S (2007) Sub-epithelial gas breakthrough during femtosecond laser flap creation for LASIK. Br J Ophthalmol 91:1373CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

13.

Srinivasan S, Rootman DS (2007) Anterior chamber gas bubble formation during femtosecond laser flap creation for LASIK. J Refract Surg 23:828–830PubMed

14.

Kaiserman I, Maresky HS, Bahar I, Rootman DS (2008) Incidence, possible risk factors, and potential effects of an opaque bubble layer created by a femtosecond laser. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:417–423CrossRefPubMed

15.

Liu CH, Sun CC, Huikang MD, Chienchieh HJ, Liu CF, Chen HF (2014) Opaque bubble layer: incidence, risk factors, and clinical relevance. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:435–440CrossRefPubMed

16.

Jung HG, Kim J, Lim TH (2015) Possible risk factors and clinical effects of an opaque bubble layer created with femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:1393–1399CrossRefPubMed

17.

Courtin R, Saad A, Guilbert E, Grise-Dulac A, Gatinel D (2015) Opaque bubble layer risk factors in femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK. J Refract Surg 31:608–612CrossRefPubMed

18.

Son G, Lee J, Jang C, Choi KY, Cho BJ, Lim TH (2017) Possible risk factors and clinical effects of opaque bubble layer in small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). J Refract Surg 33:24–29CrossRefPubMed

19.

Liu M, Zhou Y, Wu X, Ye T, Liu Q (2016) Comparison of 120- and 140-μm SMILE cap thickness results in eyes with thick corneas. Cornea 35:1CrossRef

20.

Soong HK, Malta JB (2009) Femtosecond lasers in ophthalmology. Am J Ophthalmol 147:189–197CrossRefPubMed

21.

Shah R, Shah S (2011) Effect of scanning patterns on the results of femtosecond laser lenticule extraction refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:1636–1647CrossRefPubMed

22.

Hamed AM, Fekry AY (2016) Refractive small-incision lenticule extraction: push-up and push-down techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg 42:1713–1715CrossRefPubMed

23.

Jacob S, Nariani A, Figus M, Agarwal A, Agarwal A (2016) White ring sign for uneventful lenticule separation in small-incision lenticule extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg 42:1251–1254CrossRefPubMed

24.

Wang Y, Dou R (2015) The effect of corneal biomechanics of the OBL during SMILE. Cataract Refract Surg Today Eur March:1–3

Title: Corneal thickness, residual stromal thickness, and its effect on opaque bubble layer in small-incision lenticule extraction
Authors: Jiaonan Ma
Yan Wang
Liuyang Li
Jiamei Zhang
Publication date: 01-10-2018
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: International Ophthalmology / Issue 5/2018
Print ISSN: 0165-5701
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2630
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0692-2

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Corneal thickness, residual stromal thickness, and its effect on opaque bubble layer in small-incision lenticule extraction

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2018

Reperfusion of the choriocapillaris observed using optical coherence tomography angiography in hypertensive choroidopathy

Upregulated IRAK1 and IRAK4 promoting the production of IFN-γ and IL-17 in Behcet’s disease

Pattern noise (PANO): a new automated functional glaucoma test

Clinical evaluation of aqueous outflow system in vivo and correlation with intraocular pressure before and after non-penetrating glaucoma surgery

Interface Scopulariopsis gracilis fungal keratitis following Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) with a contaminated graft

Presumed autoimmune retinopathy following chickenpox; a case report