TY - JOUR
T1 - Postoperative Efficacy, Predictability, Safety, and Visual Quality of Laser Corneal Refractive Surgery
T2 - A Network Meta-analysis
AU - Wen, Daizong
AU - McAlinden, Colm
AU - Flitcroft, Ian
AU - Tu, Ruixue
AU - Wang, Qinmei
AU - Alió, Jorge
AU - Marshall, John
AU - Huang, Yingying
AU - Song, Benhao
AU - Hu, Liang
AU - Zhao, Yune
AU - Zhu, Senmiao
AU - Gao, Rongrong
AU - Bao, Fangjun
AU - Yu, Ayong
AU - Yu, Ye
AU - Lian, Hengli
AU - Huang, Jinhai
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - Purpose To compare the postoperative efficacy, predictability, safety, and visual quality of all major forms of laser corneal refractive surgeries for correcting myopia. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the US trial registry was conducted up to November 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) reporting in accordance with the eligibility criteria were included in this review. We performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis. Results Forty-eight RCTs were identified. For efficacy (uncorrected visual acuity [UCVA]), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) ranking (from best to worst) was femtosecond-based laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), LASIK, small-incision lenticule extraction, femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK), epipolis (Epi)-LASIK, transepithelial PRK (T-PRK). For predictability (refractive spherical equivalent [SE]), a statistically significant difference was found when FS-LASIK was compared with LASIK (odds ratio [OR] 2.29, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.20–4.14), PRK (OR 2.16, 95% CrI 1.15–4.03), LASEK (OR 2.09, 95% CrI 1.08–4.55), and Epi-LASIK (OR 2.74, 95% CrI 1.11–6.20). The SUCRA ranking (from best to worst) was FS-LASIK, T-PRK, LASEK, PRK, LASIK, Epi-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the safety (best spectacle-corrected visual acuity) comparisons. For both postoperative higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and contrast sensitivity (CS), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA ranking results show that some corneal surface ablation techniques (PRK and LASEK) rank highest. Conclusions This network meta-analysis shows that there were no statistically significant differences in either visual outcomes (efficacy and safety) or visual quality (HOAs and CS). FS-LASIK behaved better in predictability than any other type of surgeries.
AB - Purpose To compare the postoperative efficacy, predictability, safety, and visual quality of all major forms of laser corneal refractive surgeries for correcting myopia. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the US trial registry was conducted up to November 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) reporting in accordance with the eligibility criteria were included in this review. We performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis. Results Forty-eight RCTs were identified. For efficacy (uncorrected visual acuity [UCVA]), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) ranking (from best to worst) was femtosecond-based laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), LASIK, small-incision lenticule extraction, femtosecond lenticule extraction (FLEx), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser epithelial keratomileusis (LASEK), epipolis (Epi)-LASIK, transepithelial PRK (T-PRK). For predictability (refractive spherical equivalent [SE]), a statistically significant difference was found when FS-LASIK was compared with LASIK (odds ratio [OR] 2.29, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.20–4.14), PRK (OR 2.16, 95% CrI 1.15–4.03), LASEK (OR 2.09, 95% CrI 1.08–4.55), and Epi-LASIK (OR 2.74, 95% CrI 1.11–6.20). The SUCRA ranking (from best to worst) was FS-LASIK, T-PRK, LASEK, PRK, LASIK, Epi-LASIK. There were no statistically significant differences in the safety (best spectacle-corrected visual acuity) comparisons. For both postoperative higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and contrast sensitivity (CS), there were no statistically significant differences between any pair of treatments analyzed. The SUCRA ranking results show that some corneal surface ablation techniques (PRK and LASEK) rank highest. Conclusions This network meta-analysis shows that there were no statistically significant differences in either visual outcomes (efficacy and safety) or visual quality (HOAs and CS). FS-LASIK behaved better in predictability than any other type of surgeries.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85017103789
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.03.013
DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.03.013
M3 - Article
C2 - 28336402
AN - SCOPUS:85017103789
SN - 0002-9394
VL - 178
SP - 65
EP - 78
JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology
ER -