ABSTRACT
@#AIM: To evaluate the early postoperative efficacy of SMART for myopia and compare it with TransPRK.<p>METHODS: Retrospective non-randomized controlled study. Totally 120 eyes of 60 patients with myopia who underwent SMART and TransPRK in our hospital from January to August 2018 were selected respectively. The uncorrected visual acuity(UCVA), visual quality, pain score, corneal epithelial healing and subepithelial haze were compared between two groups.<p>RESULTS: There was no statistical differences between two groups regarding the proportion of UCVA reaching or exceeding 1.0 at 5d, 1mo and 3mo after operation(<i>P</i>>0.05), but the visual quality of SMART group was better than that of TransPRK group at 5d after operation(<i>P</i><0.05), and with the prolongation of time, the visual quality of the two groups gradually improved. There was a significant difference in pain scores between the TransPRK group and SMART group(3.56±0.96 <i>vs</i> 3.07±1.07; 1.22±0.61 <i>vs</i> 0.84±0.59)on the 1st day and 3rd day after operation(<i>P</i><0.01). 5d after operation, the complete recovery rate of corneal in TransPRK group was lower than that in SMART group(69.2% <i>vs</i> 83.3%, <i>P</i><0.05). At 1st and 3 mo after operation, there was no difference in haze between the two groups(5.0% <i>vs</i> 5.0% and 8.3% <i>vs</i> 10.0%; <i>P</i>>0.05).<p>CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between SMART and TransPRK in the speed and stability of visual acuity recovery, but the early postoperative pain of SMART is lighter, the corneal epithelium is healed faster, and the visual quality is better.