July 2018
Volume 59, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2018
Biomechanical stability after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) using a 110 or 160μm cap thickness: An ex-vivo study on human donor corneas.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Iben Bach Damgaard
    Department of Ophthalmlology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus C, Denmark
  • Anders Ivarsen
    Department of Ophthalmlology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus C, Denmark
  • Jesper Hjortdal
    Department of Ophthalmlology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus C, Denmark
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Iben Damgaard, None; Anders Ivarsen, None; Jesper Hjortdal, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Fight for Sight, Denmark ; Synoptik-Fonden ; Carl Zeiss Meditec
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2018, Vol.59, 5761. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Iben Bach Damgaard, Anders Ivarsen, Jesper Hjortdal; Biomechanical stability after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) using a 110 or 160μm cap thickness: An ex-vivo study on human donor corneas.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):5761.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To examine the biomechanical stability after Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) using a 110 or 160μm cap thickness.

Methods : A total of 32 human donor corneas were allocated to four groups, by the combination of two cap thicknesses (110 and 160μm) and two spherical corrections (-4D and -8D). Each cornea was mounted on an artificial anterior chamber, with the chamber pressure adjusted by an 8% dextran media column attached.
Corneal tomography was obtained before and after SMILE with a chamber pressure of 15 and 40mmHg (Pentacam HR, Oculus, Wetzlar). Primary outcomes were anterior and posterior sagittal curvature for the 3mm diameter zone (Sag3mm, r) and the Total Corneal Refractive Power (TCRP, 4mm, apex, zone). The average changes after surgery (Δ= postop - preop) and with increased chamber pressure (δ= 40mmHg - 15mmHg) were compared between groups. The precise cap thickness was measured with optical coherence tomography. Mixed ANOVA was used for statistical analysis.

Results : The cap thickness averaged 117±8μm and 117±15μm for the two 110 μm groups, and 161±4μm and 157±5μm for the two 160μm groups, respectively. As seen in Table 1, a 110μm cap caused more anterior flattening and less posterior steepening than a 160μm cap for the -8D groups (p<.002), whereas no differences were seen between the -4D groups (p>.059). Before SMILE, an increased chamber pressure did not significantly change the anterior or posterior radius of curvature in any of the groups (p>.160, Table 2). After SMILE, increased chamber pressure caused a significant anterior steepening in all groups (p<.014). However, the δrpostop for the anterior curvature as well as the δTCRPpostop were comparable when using a 110 and 160μm cap (p<.171).

Conclusions : This ex vivo study demonstrated, that a 160μm cap caused less anterior and more posterior curvature steepening than a 110μm cap, and consequently less myopic correction. A tendency towards greater corneal compliance was seen when using a 110μm cap thickness in SMILE, but the differences were similar for the 110 and 160μm cap thickness.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2018 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, April 29 - May 3, 2018.

 

Table 1: Postop – preop values (Δ). Significant difference between: (a) 110 and 160μm with -8D correction; (b) -4D and -8D with 160μm cap; (c) -4D and -8D with 110μm cap.

Table 1: Postop – preop values (Δ). Significant difference between: (a) 110 and 160μm with -8D correction; (b) -4D and -8D with 160μm cap; (c) -4D and -8D with 110μm cap.

 

Table 2: 40mmHg - 15mmHg values (δ) before and after SMILE. (a) Significant different from zero for all comparisons.

Table 2: 40mmHg - 15mmHg values (δ) before and after SMILE. (a) Significant different from zero for all comparisons.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×