Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose This study aims to compare the initial three-month outcomes of a single-center experience with small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism using the VisuMax 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) versus the VisuMax 800 (SMILE Pro®; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). This experience is compared to the US Food and Drug Administration approval studies and published literature. Patients and methods The initial 45 eyes (23 patients) that underwent SMILE with the VisuMax 500 in 2018 were compared with the initial 42 eyes (21 patients) that underwent SMILE Pro® with the VisuMax 800 in 2024. These patients represent the first to be treated with SMILE or SMILE Pro® at a single institution in Draper, Utah. Data from postoperative visits up to three months of follow-up were collected and analyzed. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used in our analysis to account for inter-eye bias. Results By three months, six eyes (13.3%) reported uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/16 or better in the VisuMax 500 group compared to nine eyes (23.1%) in the VisuMax 800 group. All 87 eyes had a UDVA of 20/40 or better at three months. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean postoperative UDVA (logMAR) between platforms (0.02 ± 0.07 vs 0.04 ± 0.15; = 0.315). Safety and efficacy indices were also comparable between platforms ( = 0.406 and 0.239, respectively). VisuMax 800 demonstrated less undercorrection of astigmatism compared to VisuMax 500; however, this was not statistically significant ( = 0.174). Conclusion Both platforms remain safe and effective for the treatment of myopia with and without astigmatism. Despite the improved ergonomic technology of the VisuMax 800, its three-month visual outcomes are comparable to those of the VisuMax 500.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417058PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.89702DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

visumax 500
24
visumax 800
24
visumax
12
smile pro®
12
three months
12
visual outcomes
8
lenticule extraction
8
versus visumax
8
carl zeiss
8
zeiss meditec
8

Similar Publications

Purpose This study aims to compare the initial three-month outcomes of a single-center experience with small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism using the VisuMax 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) versus the VisuMax 800 (SMILE Pro®; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). This experience is compared to the US Food and Drug Administration approval studies and published literature. Patients and methods The initial 45 eyes (23 patients) that underwent SMILE with the VisuMax 500 in 2018 were compared with the initial 42 eyes (21 patients) that underwent SMILE Pro® with the VisuMax 800 in 2024.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study compared clinical outcomes between small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedures performed with the Visumax 800 and Visumax 500 femtosecond lasers. We compared the clinical outcomes of 100 eyes of 50 patients who underwent SMILE using the Visumax 800 (SMILE Pro group) and 100 eyes of 50 patients who underwent SMILE using the Visumax 500 femtosecond laser (SMILE group). Outcomes were assessed at a 3-month follow-up, including standard visual outcomes, optic zone decentration, and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: To compare early postoperative visual outcomes and higher order aberrations (HOAs) between plasma and conventional keratorefractive lenticular extractions (P-KLEx and C-KLEx).

Methods: In this retrospective case series, records of patients who underwent KLEx surgery using two protocols-C-KLEx (symmetric spot/track distance laser spacing, 100-nJ pulse energy, VisuMax 500; Carl Zeiss Meditec) or P-KLEx (asymmetric spot/track distance laser spacing, 85-nJ pulse energy, VisuMax 800; Carl Zeiss Meditec)-were reviewed. Both groups received an identical total energy dosage of 625 mJ/cm.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) has been shown to be safe and effective for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism. Residual refractive errors reduce the uncorrected postoperative visual acuity leading to patient dissatisfaction and increased retreatment rates.

Aim Of The Study: The aim was to assess the potential influence of the recommendations of the Committee for Refractive Surgery (KRC) on the likelihood of retreatment and to compare the results of various methods for retreatment after KLEx for myopia.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: The nomograms for the laser procedure "Laser Blended Vision" (Presbyond) for myopia were developed based on a 6 mm zone. The aim of these studies is to demonstrate that customized nomograms are necessary when changing the optical zone. The three-month results after the Presbyond correction using a 6.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF