Review of Corneal Biomechanical Properties Following LASIK and SMILE for Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism

Overview

Journal Open Ophthalmol J

Publisher Bentham Open

Specialty Ophthalmology

Date 2018 Aug 21

PMID 30123381

Citations 15

Authors

Iben Bach Damgaard

Mohamed Reffat

Jesper Hjortdal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Worldwide, femtosecond Laser Assisted Keratomileusis (LASIK) is a well known and commonly used refractive technique, although Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) has become increasingly popular since it was introduced in 2011. In LASIK, a corneal flap is cut with a microkeratome or femtosecond laser, followed by thinning of the stromal bed with excimer laser ablation. In SMILE, a minor intrastromal lenticule is cut with a femtosecond laser and subsequently removed through a small incision, leaving the anterior and strongest part of the cornea almost intact. Both LASIK and SMILE require cutting of corneal lamellae that may reduce the biomechanical stability of the cornea, with the potential risk of corneal iatrogenic ectasia as a severe complication. However, SMILE preserves the anterior corneal integrity and may, in theory, better preserve the corneal biomechanical strength than LASIK after surgery. A review aimed to examine the current literature that describes and compares the corneal biomechanical properties after Laser Assisted Keratomileusis (LASIK) and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE). A comprehensive search was performed in Pubmed.gov using the following search queries: Corneal biomechanical properties, corneal biomechanics, ocular response analyser, ocular response analyzer, ORA, , Corvis, Corvis ST, LASIK, and SMILE.

Citing Articles

Relationship of corneal percent tissue altered with visual outcome in small incision lenticule extraction surgery.

Wu X, Lin Y, Chen X, Li J Int Ophthalmol. 2025; 45(1):95.

PMID: 40085260 DOI: 10.1007/s10792-025-03483-9.

Early elastic and viscoelastic corneal biomechanical changes after photorefractive keratectomy and small incision lenticule extraction.

Sedaghat M, Momeni-Moghaddam H, Yekta A, Maddah N, Roberts C, Savardashtaki M Int Ophthalmol. 2024; 44(1):302.

PMID: 38954134 DOI: 10.1007/s10792-024-03169-8.

Refractive outcomes of small lenticule extraction (SMILE) Pro® with a 2 MHz femtosecond laser.

Saad A, Klabe K, Kirca M, Kretz F, Auffarth G, Breyer D Int Ophthalmol. 2024; 44(1):52.

PMID: 38340212 PMC: 10858925. DOI: 10.1007/s10792-024-02915-2.

Comparative study of small incision refractive lenticule extraction with 5 mm versus 6.5 mm optic zone for myopia.

Ladi J, Gaikwad A, Shah N Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023; 71(7):2717-2721.

PMID: 37417110 PMC: 10491035. DOI: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_2559_22.

Corneal Biomechanics After SMILE, Femtosecond-Assisted LASIK, and Photorefractive Keratectomy: A Matched Comparison Study.

Hashemi H, Roberts C, Elsheikh A, Mehravaran S, Panahi P, Asgari S Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023; 12(3):12.

PMID: 36928130 PMC: 10029763. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.12.3.12.

References

Randleman J, Russell B, Ward M, Thompson K, Stulting R . Risk factors and prognosis for corneal ectasia after LASIK. Ophthalmology. 2003; 110(2):267-75. DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(02)01727-X. View

Aghamohammadzadeh H, Newton R, Meek K . X-ray scattering used to map the preferred collagen orientation in the human cornea and limbus. Structure. 2004; 12(2):249-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2004.01.002. View

Luce D . Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31(1):156-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.10.044. View

Bergmanson J, Horne J, Doughty M, Garcia M, Gondo M . Assessment of the number of lamellae in the central region of the normal human corneal stroma at the resolution of the transmission electron microscope. Eye Contact Lens. 2005; 31(6):281-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.icl.0000165280.94927.0d. View

Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Cunliffe I, Mantry S . The use of the Reichert ocular response analyser to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2006; 29(5):257-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2006.09.006. View

Kotecha A, Elsheikh A, Roberts C, Zhu H, Garway-Heath D . Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47(12):5337-47. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-0557. View

Randleman J, Dawson D, Grossniklaus H, McCarey B, Edelhauser H . Depth-dependent cohesive tensile strength in human donor corneas: implications for refractive surgery. J Refract Surg. 2008; 24(1):S85-9. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20080101-15. View

Kerautret J, Colin J, Touboul D, Roberts C . Biomechanical characteristics of the ectatic cornea. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34(3):510-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.11.018. View

Glass D, Roberts C, Litsky A, Weber P . A viscoelastic biomechanical model of the cornea describing the effect of viscosity and elasticity on hysteresis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008; 49(9):3919-26. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.07-1321. View

10.

Kamiya K, Hagishima M, Fujimura F, Shimizu K . Factors affecting corneal hysteresis in normal eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008; 246(10):1491-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-008-0864-x. View

11.

Solomon K, de Castro L, Sandoval H, Biber J, Groat B, Neff K . LASIK world literature review: quality of life and patient satisfaction. Ophthalmology. 2009; 116(4):691-701. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.12.037. View

12.

Hager A, Wegscheider K, Wiegand W . Changes of extracellular matrix of the cornea in diabetes mellitus. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009; 247(10):1369-74. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-009-1088-4. View

13.

Oncel B, Dinc U, Orge F, Yalvac B . Comparison of IOP measurement by ocular response analyzer, dynamic contour, Goldmann applanation, and noncontact tonometry. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2009; 19(6):936-41. DOI: 10.1177/112067210901900607. View

14.

Abitbol O, Bouden J, Doan S, Hoang-Xuan T, Gatinel D . Corneal hysteresis measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer in normal and glaucomatous eyes. Acta Ophthalmol. 2009; 88(1):116-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01554.x. View

15.

Sekundo W, Kunert K, 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. 2010; 95(3):335-9. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2009.174284. View

16.

Shah R, Shah S, Sengupta S . Results of small incision lenticule extraction: All-in-one femtosecond laser refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 37(1):127-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.033. View

17.

Ford M, Dupps Jr W, Rollins A, Sinha R, Hu Z . Method for optical coherence elastography of the cornea. J Biomed Opt. 2011; 16(1):016005. PMC: 3041813. DOI: 10.1117/1.3526701. View

18.

Alhamad T, Meek K . Comparison of factors that influence the measurement of corneal hysteresis in vivo and in vitro. Acta Ophthalmol. 2011; 89(5):e443-50. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2011.02150.x. View

19.

Foster P, Broadway D, Garway-Heath D, Yip J, Luben R, Hayat S . Intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanics in an adult British population: the EPIC-Norfolk eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011; 52(11):8179-85. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.11-7853. View

20.

Scarcelli G, Pineda R, Yun S . Brillouin optical microscopy for corneal biomechanics. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011; 53(1):185-90. PMC: 3292356. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.11-8281. View