Top

BMC Ophthalmology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Accommodative changes after SMILE for moderate to high myopia correction

Authors: Ke Zheng, Tian Han, Xingtao Zhou

Published in: BMC Ophthalmology | Issue 1/2016

Abstract

Background

To investigate accommodative response and accommodative lag changes after femtosecond laser small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for moderate to high myopia correction.

Methods

A total of 32 eyes of 32 patients with no strabismus who underwent SMILE were enrolled in this prospective clinical study. The accommodative response was obtained viewing monocularly with spherical equivalent refractive error corrected, using an open-field autorefractor at different stimulus levels (2.00D, 2.50D, 3.00D, 4.00D and 5.00D) for the right eye before a standard SMILE surgery and at 1-month follow-up after surgery.

Results

The mean age of the patients were 23.34 ± 2.90 years and the mean preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent was −5.74 ± 1.98 diopters. Significant differences were detected in both preoperative and postoperative accommodative responses to different stimulus levels (P < 0.001). Multiple linear regression model analysis revealed preoperative manifest refractive spherical equivalent (P = 0.006) and preoperative accommodative lag (P = 0.04) showed a significant impact on postoperative accommodative lag.

Conclusions

This is the first report of accommodative changes after SMILE. Our preliminary results showed that a decrease in postoperative accommodative lag that might be related to the relief of the visual discomfort symptom.

Shah R, Shah S, Sengupta S. Results of small incision lenticule extraction: All-in-one femtosecond laser refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:127–37.CrossRefPubMed

Sekundo W, Kunert KS, Blum M. Small incision corneal refractive surgery using the small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedure for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism: results of a 6 month prospective study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95:335–9.CrossRefPubMed

Zhao Y, Li M, Yao P, Shah R, Knorz MC, Zhou X. Development of the continuous curvilinear lenticulerrhexis technique for small incision lenticule extraction. J Refract Surg. 2015;31:16–21.CrossRefPubMed

Ivarsen A, Asp S, Hjortdal J. Safety and complications of more than 1500 small-incision lenticule extraction procedures. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:822–8.CrossRefPubMed

Chase C, Tosha C, Borsting E, Ridder 3rd WH. Visual discomfort and objective measures of static accommodation. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86:883–9.CrossRefPubMed

Momeni-Moghaddam H, Goss DA, Sobhani M. Accommodative response under monocular and binocular conditions as a function of phoria in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects. Clin Exp Optom. 2014;97:36–42.CrossRefPubMed

Tosha C, Borsting E, Ridder 3rd WH, Chase C. Accommodation response and visual discomfort. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2009;29:625–33.CrossRefPubMed

Karimian F, Baradaran-Rafii A, Bagheri A, Eslani M, Bayat H, Aramesh S, Yaseri M, Amin-Shokravi A. Accommodative changes after photorefractive keratectomy in myopic eyes. Optom Vis Sci. 2010;87:833–8.CrossRefPubMed

Liu LN, Lu F, Wang QM, Xue AQ, Chen SH, Chen HB. Change of accommodative function in phakic eyes with iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens implantation. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2010;46:621–4.PubMed

10.

Fu J, Wang XZ, Wang NL, Wang JH, Zhao SQ. Accommodation perimeters after phakic posterior chamber implantable contact lens implantation. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2013;49:633–6.PubMed

11.

Wick B, Hall P. Relation among accommodative facility, lag, and amplitude in elementary school children. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1987;64:593–8.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Kalsi M, Heron G, Charman WN. Changes in the static accommodation response with age. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001;21:77–84.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Correction of Myopia Evaluation Trial 2 Study Group for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator G, Manny RE, Chandler DL, Scheiman MM, Gwiazda JE, Cotter SA, Everett DF, Holmes JM, Hyman LG, Kulp MT, Lyon DW, Marsh-Tootle W, Matta N, Melia BM, Norton TT, Repka MX, Silbert DI, Weissberg EM. Accommodative lag by autorefraction and two dynamic retinoscopy methods. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86:233–43.CrossRef

14.

Momeni-Moghaddam H, McAlinden C, Azimi A, Sobhani M, Skiadaresi E. Comparing accommodative function between the dominant and non-dominant eye. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2014;252:509–14.CrossRefPubMed

15.

del Pilar CM, Garcia-Munoz A, Garcia-Bernabeu JR, Lopez A. Comparison between MEM and Nott dynamic retinoscopy. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76:650–5.CrossRef

16.

Garcia A, Cacho P. MEM and Nott dynamic retinoscopy in patients with disorders of vergence and accommodation. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2002;22:214–20.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Gwiazda J, Thorn F, Bauer J, Held R. Myopic children show insufficient accommodative response to blur. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:690–4.PubMed

18.

Nakatsuka C, Hasebe S, Nonaka F, Ohtsuki H. Accommodative lag under habitual seeing conditions: comparison between myopic and emmetropic children. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2005;49:189–94.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rosenfield M, Gilmartin B. Effect of target proximity on the open-loop accommodative response. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67:74–9.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Jimenez R, Martinez-Almeida L, Salas C, Ortiz C. Contact lenses vs spectacles in myopes: is there any difference in accommodative and binocular function? Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249:925–35.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Borsting E, Chase C, Tosha C, Ridder 3rd WH. Longitudinal study of visual discomfort symptoms in college students. Optom Vis Sci. 2008;85:992–8.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Borsting E, Chase CH, Ridder 3rd WH. Measuring visual discomfort in college students. Optom Vis Sci. 2007;84:745–51.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Borsting E, Tosha C, Chase C, Ridder 3rd WH. Measuring near-induced transient myopia in college students with visual discomfort. Optom Vis Sci. 2010;87:760–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Drew SA, Borsting E, Escobar AE, Liu C, Castellanos E, Chase C. Can chronic visual discomfort measures accurately predict acute symptoms? Optom Vis Sci. 2013;90:1149–55.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Accommodative changes after SMILE for moderate to high myopia correction
Authors: Ke Zheng
Tian Han
Xingtao Zhou
Publication date: 01-12-2016
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Ophthalmology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2415
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-016-0352-8

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Accommodative changes after SMILE for moderate to high myopia correction

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Fungal keratitis in patients with corneal ulcer attending Minilik II Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Preserved retinal sensitivity in spatial correspondence to an intrachoroidal cavitation area with full thickness retinal defect: a case report

Case report of subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma complicated by eyelid swelling

Atypical presentation of primary intraocular lymphoma

Influence of posterior corneal astigmatism on postoperative refractive astigmatism in pseudophakic eyes after cataract surgery

Influence of upper and temporal transconjunctival sclerocorneal incision on marginal reflex distance after cataract surgery