Davis Jonathan C, Sitto Mina M, Herrera Eduardo, Palmer Bryce L, Hoopes Phillip, Moshirfar Majid
Ophthalmology, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, USA.
Ophthalmology, Hoopes Vision, Hoopes Vision Research Center, Draper, USA.
Cureus. 2025 Aug 9;17(8):e89702. doi: 10.7759/cureus.89702. eCollection 2025 Aug.
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.
目的 本研究旨在比较单中心使用VisuMax 500(德国耶拿卡尔蔡司医疗科技公司)与VisuMax 800(SMILE Pro®;德国耶拿卡尔蔡司医疗科技公司)进行小切口透镜切除术(SMILE)矫正近视和近视散光的最初三个月结果。将该经验与美国食品药品监督管理局的批准研究及已发表文献进行比较。患者与方法 将2018年使用VisuMax 500接受SMILE手术的最初45只眼(23例患者)与2024年使用VisuMax 800接受SMILE Pro®手术的最初42只眼(21例患者)进行比较。这些患者是犹他州德雷珀市一家机构首批接受SMILE或SMILE Pro®治疗的患者。收集并分析了术后三个月随访的就诊数据。我们的分析中使用广义估计方程(GEE)来考虑眼间偏差。结果 到三个月时,VisuMax 500组有6只眼(13.3%)报告未矫正远视力(UDVA)为20/16或更好,而VisuMax 800组为9只眼(23.1%)。所有87只眼在三个月时UDVA均为20/40或更好。不同平台术后平均UDVA(logMAR)无统计学显著差异(0.02±0.07对0.04±0.15;P = 0.315)。不同平台的安全性和有效性指标也具有可比性(分别为P = 0.406和0.239)。与VisuMax 500相比,VisuMax 800显示出的散光欠矫更少;然而,这无统计学显著差异(P = 0.174)。结论 两种平台对于治疗伴有或不伴有散光的近视均保持安全有效。尽管VisuMax 800的人体工程学技术有所改进,但其三个月的视觉效果与VisuMax 500相当。