LAUSR

ABSTRACT Purposes The purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically compare the safety, efficacy, and predictability of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Methods This study covered the data searched from the PubMed, the EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Handbook was also referred to as evaluating the quality of the included studies. In addition, this meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4 software. Results A total of 11 randomized controlled trails (RCTs) were included. The proportion of eyes with refraction within ±0.5D was higher in LASIK group compared with SMILE group (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.99; p = .04). The spherical aberration (SA) was smaller in SMILE group compared with LASIK group (RR, −0.12; 95% CI, −0.23 to −0.01; p = .04). There were no significant differences between two groups with regard to final mean refractive spherical equivalent (SE) (MD, −0.04; 95% CI, −0.12 to 0.03; p = .22), proportion of eyes losing one or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.58 to 2.27; p = .70), proportion of eyes with uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA) of 20/20 or better (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.05; p = .71), postoperative mean logMAR UCVA (MD, 0.01; 95% CI, −0.00 to 0.03; p = .13), postoperative refraction within ±1.0D (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.02; p = .60), postoperative astigmatism within ±0.25, 0.5 and 1.0D (RR, 0.80, 0.99, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.83, 0.94 to 1.05, 0.98 to 1.02; p = .60, 0.86, 0.87), postoperative higher order aberrations (HOAs) (RR, 0.00; 95% CI, −0.16 to 0.16; p = .99). Conclusion For predictability, LASIK was superior to SMILE. There were comparably safety and efficacy for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism in SMILE and LASIK. SA was smaller after SMILE than after LASIK.