Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of SMILE and Wavefront-Guided LASIK in Low and Moderate Myopia

To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia. This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two group...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of refractive surgery (1995) Vol. 33; no. 5; pp. 298 - 304
Main Authors Khalifa, Mounir A, Ghoneim, Ahmed, Shafik Shaheen, Mohamed, Aly, Mohamed G, Piñero, David P
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States SLACK INCORPORATED 01.05.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia. This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. Mean efficacy index was 0.92 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively (P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively (P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order (P < .001) and coma (P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree (P ≤ .001) were observed after SMILE. SMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298-304.].
AbstractList To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia. This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. Mean efficacy index was 0.92 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively (P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively (P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order (P < .001) and coma (P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree (P ≤ .001) were observed after SMILE. SMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298-304.].
PURPOSETo compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia.METHODSThis was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up.RESULTSMean efficacy index was 0.92 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively (P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively (P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups (P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order (P < .001) and coma (P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree (P ≤ .001) were observed after SMILE.CONCLUSIONSSMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298-304.].
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia. METHODS: This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent ≤ 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Mean efficacy index was 0.92 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively ( P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within ±0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups ( P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively ( P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 ± 0.08 and 1.20 ± 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups ( P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order ( P < .001) and coma ( P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree ( P ≤ .001) were observed after SMILE. CONCLUSIONS: SMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [ J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298–304.]
To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia. This was a prospective, comparative study enrolling 110 eyes with low and moderate myopia (spherical equivalent <= 6.00 diopters [D]). Two groups were differentiated according to the surgical technique used: the WFG LASIK group included 51 eyes (51 patients) undergoing WFG LASIK using the STAR S4IR excimer laser and the iDesign aberrometer (Abbott Medical Optics, Abbott Park, IL) and the SMILE group included 59 eyes (59 patients) undergoing SMILE with the VisuMax platform (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Visual, refractive, aberrometric, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. Mean efficacy index was 0.92 +- 0.11 and 1.12 +- 0.17 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups, respectively ( P < .001). Postoperative spherical equivalent was within +-0.50 D in 81.54% and 98% of eyes in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups ( P < .001), and postoperative cylinder was 0.50 or below in 84.7% and 100% of eyes, respectively ( P = .038). Mean safety index was 0.98 +- 0.08 and 1.20 +- 0.14 in the SMILE and WFG LASIK groups ( P < .001), with losses of lines of corrected distance visual acuity in 6.8% and 0.0% of eyes, respectively. Higher increase in higher order ( P < .001) and coma ( P < .001) root mean square and higher decrease in contrast sensitivity for 6, 12, and 18 cycles/degree ( P <= .001) were observed after SMILE. SMILE and WFG LASIK are efficacious and safe procedures for the correction of low and moderate myopia, but WFG LASIK allows a more predictable outcome and better aberrometric control. [ J Refract Surg. 2017;33(5):298-304.]
Author Piñero, David P
Shafik Shaheen, Mohamed
Khalifa, Mounir A
Aly, Mohamed G
Ghoneim, Ahmed
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Mounir A
  surname: Khalifa
  fullname: Khalifa, Mounir A
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Ahmed
  surname: Ghoneim
  fullname: Ghoneim, Ahmed
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Mohamed
  surname: Shafik Shaheen
  fullname: Shafik Shaheen, Mohamed
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Mohamed G
  surname: Aly
  fullname: Aly, Mohamed G
– sequence: 5
  givenname: David P
  surname: Piñero
  fullname: Piñero, David P
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28486720$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpdkU9P4zAQxS0E4v83QCtLXLhk8dhxbB-rimWrTcUBENwiN55ojZK4xAmrfntcoHvgNCPN7z1p3jsh-33okZALYD-F4foamAZp1HPGGSjGOc8Y7JFjMEJnXBjYT3tCsi1zRE5ifGEMklAdkiOuc10ozo5JOw_d2g529G9IZ71tN9FHGho6_kU6b33va9vSu2msQ4cfh_vloryhtnf0yb5hM4R-zG4n79DRcna_-EN9T8vw74NYBofJG-lyE9benpGDxrYRz7_mKXn8dfMw_52Vd7eL-azMaqGLMbNG5ICQq2LV8HyVfpFCMHRQoBXKgrGaFYo56XIpHWhVG2NXgmvNUUDaTsnVp-96CK8TxrHqfKyxbW2PYYoVGCYLpTSXCb38hr6EaUg5JEqbQnImBSQq_6TqIcQ4YFOtB9_ZYVMBq7ZtVLs2ql0bFdvKfnyZT6sO3X_RLn7xDskChFc
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1177_1120672119865699
crossref_primary_10_1007_s10792_021_02003_9
crossref_primary_10_1177_11206721221138306
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajo_2021_11_013
crossref_primary_10_57204_001c_89065
crossref_primary_10_1111_aos_15638
crossref_primary_10_3928_1081597X_20180607_02
crossref_primary_10_1007_s40123_023_00766_1
crossref_primary_10_1167_iovs_17_23451
crossref_primary_10_1007_s10792_021_01810_4
crossref_primary_10_3928_1081597X_20180514_01
crossref_primary_10_1007_s40123_018_0137_7
crossref_primary_10_58931_cect_2022_1317
crossref_primary_10_1177_1120672120945664
crossref_primary_10_1177_2516043518766775
crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2022_780000
crossref_primary_10_1080_02713683_2020_1822418
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jfo_2024_104085
crossref_primary_10_1080_08820538_2022_2107399
crossref_primary_10_1097_j_jcrs_0000000000001103
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jfo_2018_01_003
crossref_primary_10_1097_APO_0000000000000258
crossref_primary_10_1111_aos_14420
Cites_doi 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.033
10.1371/journal.pone.0077797
10.3928/1081597X-20150820-04
10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.10.004
10.3928/1081597X-20140219-02
10.1007/s00417-013-2400-x
10.1016/S0886-3350(97)80153-8
10.1371/journal.pone.0081435
10.3928/1081597X-20140415-02
10.1097/ICO.0000000000000707
10.1097/ICO.0000000000000782
10.3928/1081597X-20130806-01
10.1016/S0886-3350(00)00798-7
10.1167/iovs.13-13324
10.1097/ICL.0000000000000225
10.3928/1081597X-20150303-01
10.3928/1081597X-20140814-02
10.3928/1081597X-20140320-02
10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.05.004
10.1155/2014/265012
10.3928/1081597X-20140320-03
10.1586/17469899.2016.1131610
10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307238
10.1167/iovs.13-13714
10.1186/1471-2415-15-8
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated.
Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated
Copyright_xml – notice: Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated.
– notice: Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
AAYXX
CITATION
3V.
7X7
7XB
88E
8FI
8FJ
8FK
ABUWG
AFKRA
BENPR
CCPQU
FYUFA
GHDGH
K9.
M0S
M1P
PQEST
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
S0X
7X8
DOI 10.3928/1081597X-20170222-01
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
CrossRef
ProQuest Central (Corporate)
Health Medical collection
ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
Hospital Premium Collection
Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest Central
AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central
ProQuest One Community College
Health Research Premium Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)
PML(ProQuest Medical Library)
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest Central China
SIRS Editorial
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
CrossRef
SIRS Editorial
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest Hospital Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Central
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete
Health Research Premium Collection
ProQuest Medical Library
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic
CrossRef
SIRS Editorial
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 3
  dbid: 7X7
  name: Health Medical collection
  url: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1938-2391
EndPage 304
ExternalDocumentID 4322254341
10_3928_1081597X_20170222_01
28486720
Genre Randomized Controlled Trial
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
GroupedDBID ---
0R~
29L
36B
3V.
4.4
5GY
7X7
88E
8FI
8FJ
ABJNI
ABUWG
ACGFS
ADBBV
AENEX
AFKRA
AHMBA
ALIPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
BENPR
BPHCQ
BVXVI
C45
CCPQU
CGR
CUY
CVF
EBD
EBS
ECM
EIF
EJD
EMB
EMOBN
F5P
FYUFA
HMCUK
HZ~
M1P
NPM
O9-
OVD
P2P
PQQKQ
PROAC
PSQYO
RWG
RWL
S0X
SV3
TAE
TEORI
UKHRP
.GJ
354
53G
AAYXX
CITATION
IAO
INH
ITC
7XB
8FK
K9.
PQEST
PQUKI
PRINS
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-a9341e1476bf24b3915330ed16ea37a19a80670d5d455d187c99ab32882e31ab3
IEDL.DBID 7X7
ISSN 1081-597X
IngestDate Fri Aug 16 06:25:02 EDT 2024
Thu Oct 10 18:43:04 EDT 2024
Thu Sep 26 16:00:01 EDT 2024
Sat Sep 28 08:48:05 EDT 2024
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 5
Language English
License Copyright 2017, SLACK Incorporated.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c386t-a9341e1476bf24b3915330ed16ea37a19a80670d5d455d187c99ab32882e31ab3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-2
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
PMID 28486720
PQID 1896520531
PQPubID 34110
PageCount 7
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_1905677825
proquest_journals_1896520531
crossref_primary_10_3928_1081597X_20170222_01
pubmed_primary_28486720
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2017-May-01
2017-05-00
20170501
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2017-05-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 05
  year: 2017
  text: 2017-May-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
– name: Thorofare
PublicationTitle Journal of refractive surgery (1995)
PublicationTitleAlternate J Refract Surg
PublicationYear 2017
Publisher SLACK INCORPORATED
Publisher_xml – name: SLACK INCORPORATED
References e_1_3_2_26_2
e_1_3_2_27_2
e_1_3_2_20_2
e_1_3_2_21_2
e_1_3_2_22_2
e_1_3_2_23_2
e_1_3_2_24_2
e_1_3_2_25_2
e_1_3_2_9_2
e_1_3_2_15_2
e_1_3_2_8_2
e_1_3_2_16_2
e_1_3_2_7_2
e_1_3_2_17_2
e_1_3_2_6_2
e_1_3_2_18_2
Waring GO (e_1_3_2_19_2) 2000; 16
e_1_3_2_10_2
e_1_3_2_5_2
e_1_3_2_11_2
e_1_3_2_4_2
e_1_3_2_12_2
e_1_3_2_3_2
e_1_3_2_13_2
e_1_3_2_2_2
e_1_3_2_14_2
References_xml – ident: e_1_3_2_3_2
  doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.033
– ident: e_1_3_2_10_2
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077797
– ident: e_1_3_2_4_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150820-04
– ident: e_1_3_2_5_2
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.10.004
– ident: e_1_3_2_7_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140219-02
– ident: e_1_3_2_8_2
  doi: 10.1007/s00417-013-2400-x
– ident: e_1_3_2_20_2
  doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(97)80153-8
– ident: e_1_3_2_9_2
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081435
– ident: e_1_3_2_25_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140415-02
– ident: e_1_3_2_13_2
  doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000707
– ident: e_1_3_2_18_2
  doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000782
– ident: e_1_3_2_27_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20130806-01
– ident: e_1_3_2_21_2
  doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(00)00798-7
– ident: e_1_3_2_6_2
  doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-13324
– ident: e_1_3_2_12_2
  doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000225
– volume: 16
  start-page: 459
  year: 2000
  ident: e_1_3_2_19_2
  article-title: Standard graphs for reporting refractive surgery
  publication-title: J Refract Surg
  contributor:
    fullname: Waring GO
– ident: e_1_3_2_15_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150303-01
– ident: e_1_3_2_16_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140814-02
– ident: e_1_3_2_24_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140320-02
– ident: e_1_3_2_11_2
  doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.05.004
– ident: e_1_3_2_26_2
  doi: 10.1155/2014/265012
– ident: e_1_3_2_17_2
  doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140320-03
– ident: e_1_3_2_2_2
  doi: 10.1586/17469899.2016.1131610
– ident: e_1_3_2_14_2
  doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307238
– ident: e_1_3_2_22_2
  doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-13714
– ident: e_1_3_2_23_2
  doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-15-8
SSID ssj0019287
Score 2.3528523
Snippet To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate myopia....
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate...
PURPOSETo compare the clinical outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and wavefront-guided LASIK (WFG LASIK) in eyes with low and moderate...
SourceID proquest
crossref
pubmed
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 298
SubjectTerms Aberrometry
Clinical outcomes
Contrast Sensitivity
Corneal Stroma - diagnostic imaging
Corneal Stroma - surgery
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ - methods
Lasers, Excimer - therapeutic use
Myopia - diagnosis
Myopia - physiopathology
Myopia - surgery
Prospective Studies
Refraction, Ocular
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Visual Acuity
Title Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of SMILE and Wavefront-Guided LASIK in Low and Moderate Myopia
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28486720
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1896520531
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1905677825
Volume 33
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV3dT9swED_xIU28TAzYVr5kJF4t4vgreZoAlcFoAcHQ-hY5tS1VqpJubZn47zknTnnaXqLIthLn7uL7nc93B3CqvUcxsJq6HG0TwaynpZcML0KYXJWa-xDvPLxT18_ix0iO4obbPB6r7NbEZqG29TjskZ-xLFcyDSLzbfabhqpRwbsaS2iswyZLExWOdOnRyuBC8NIUyGOo9igC51EbOoeIIDsLbaEJpYTpYPTQWBZmpZr-gTcbvXO1DR8jYCTnLYc_wZqrduDDMLrEd2F6-Z6_m3QpRkjtCSI7ErN-Tsn9coGf6ZqOp-HNoE9MZckv8-J8yGBAvy8n1lkyOH-6uSWTigzqv82IplQawlEyfK1nE7MHz1f9n5fXNJZQoGOeqQU1OWopx4RWpU9FGbLBc544y5QzXBuWmywE6lhphZSWZXqc56bkKeJuxxnefYaNqq7cVyCInIzgAQFIJUo1Lpl20ic-4x5RmlQ9oB31ilmbKaNACyNQu-ioXXTULhLWg8OOxEX8b-bFO5d7cLLqRokPbgxTuXqJY3KcgUZkI3vwpWXN6oWobDOl02T__w8_gK0wk_bg4iFsLP4s3RGCi0V53EjQMWxe9O8eHt8Ar1_JUA
link.rule.ids 315,783,787,12068,21400,27936,27937,31731,31732,33756,33757,43322,43817,74073,74630
linkProvider ProQuest
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9QwEB5BkaCXimfZUsBIXK2u16_khKqqZZcm5dBW7C1y1ra0UpUs7S6o_74zibM9wSWKbCtxxhPPNx57PoCvNkZUA295yNE3UcJHXkct8KKUy01tZaTzzuWFmV6rH3M9Twtud2lb5TAndhO1bxe0Rn4kstzoCanMt9VvTqxRFF1NFBpP4Rnl4SIGAzvfOlwIXjqCPIFmjyNwnvdH5xARZEdURkWoJcKS08MTLczWNP0Db3Z25-wl7CXAyI77EX4FT0LzGp6XKST-Bm5OHvN3syHFCGsjQ2THUtbPG_Zzs8bPDF3FZTkrTplrPPvl_oRIGQz4983SB8-K48vZOVs2rGj_di06qjSEo6y8b1dL9xauz06vTqY8USjwhczMmrscrVQQypo6TlRN2eClHAcvTHDSOpG7jA7qeO2V1l5kdpHnrpYTxN1BCrx7BztN24T3wBA5OSUJAWijarOohQ06jmMmI6I0bUbAB-lVqz5TRoUeBkm7GqRdDdKuxmIEh4OIq_Tf3FWPozyCL9tq1HgKY7gmtBtsk2MPLCIbPYL9fmi2L0Rjmxk7GR_8_-Gf4cX0qiyqYnZx_gF2qVf9JsZD2FnfbsJHBBrr-lOnTQ_kCMqd
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV3db9MwED9BJ028IL7pGGAkXq3G8Vf8hMZoWVlbJsZE3yKntqVKU1JYO8R_zzlxuid4iSLbSpzzxfc73xfAex0CsoHT1BvUTQRzgVZBMrwIYY2qNA8x3nm-UGdX4stSLpP_001yq-z3xHajds0qnpGPWGGUzCPLjEJyi7j4NPmw-UljBaloaU3lNO7DgRaKZwM4-DheXHzb2xRM3pbLYygEKcLoZRdIh_igGMW22IQ8w3RUgWgqErMXVP9An60UmjyChwk-kpNuvR_DPV8_gcN5MpA_hevTu2zepE84QppAEOeRlAP0mnzdbfGjfdtxOZ_OxsTWjvywtz7EfAb0827tvCOzk8vpOVnXZNb8bke0hdMQnJL5n2azts_gajL-fnpGU0EFuuKF2lJrUGZ5JrSqQi6qmBue88w7przl2jJjixi246QTUjpW6JUxtuI5onDPGd49h0Hd1P4lEMRRVvCIB6QSlVpVTHsZslDwgJhNqiHQnnrlpsubUaK-Eald9tQue2qXGRvCcU_iMv1FN-Xdmg_h3b4b-T8aNWztmx2OMTgDjThHDuFFtzT7F6LoLZTOs6P_P_wtHCIrlbPp4vwVPIiT6jwaj2Gw_bXzrxF1bKs3iZ3-AjBr0Do
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative+Analysis+of+the+Clinical+Outcomes+of+SMILE+and+Wavefront-Guided+LASIK+in+Low+and+Moderate+Myopia&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+refractive+surgery+%281995%29&rft.au=Khalifa%2C+Mounir+A&rft.au=Ghoneim%2C+Ahmed&rft.au=Shafik+Shaheen%2C+Mohamed&rft.au=Aly%2C+Mohamed+G&rft.date=2017-05-01&rft.issn=1081-597X&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=298&rft_id=info:doi/10.3928%2F1081597X-20170222-01&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F28486720&rft.externalDocID=28486720
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1081-597X&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1081-597X&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1081-597X&client=summon