RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of topography-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (TG-LASIK) and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE®) for correcting myopia and myopic astigmatism. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized contralateral study, 34 patients (68 eyes) received TG-LASIK in one eye, and SMILE in their fellow eye. Efficacy, safety, predictability, higher-order aberrations, corneal tomography, biomechanics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed preoperatively and up to 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Both platforms showed comparable efficacy at 3 months (TG-LASIK 1.08 ± 0.19; SMILE 0.98 ± 0.17, p = 0.055). However, TG-LASIK demonstrated quicker visual recovery, with 63% and 89% achieving uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/16 or better at 1 day and 1 week, respectively, compared to SMILE (34% and 63%; p < 0.05). Safety index at 3 months did not significantly differ between TG-LASIK and SMILE (p = 0.223). TG-LASIK and SMILE had 44% and 56% of eyes within 0.13 D of spherical equivalent (SEQ) target, respectively. SMILE induced more total higher-order aberrations (HOAs), vertical coma, and oblique trefoil than TG-LASIK at 3 months (p < 0.05). Both platforms showed similar increases in epithelial remodeling, but SMILE induced thicker epithelium than TG-LASIK at the 7.0-mm nasal zonal area. No significant differences were found in corneal hysteresis (CH) or corneal resistance factor (CRF) at 3 months (p > 0.05). Reported symptoms of glare, halos, rings, starbursts, or dry eye did not significantly differ between groups at 3 months (p > 0.05). Overall, 59% of patients preferred their TG-LASIK treated eye at 1 month, but 65% of patients had no specific eye preference at 3 months. CONCLUSION: TG-LASIK and SMILE demonstrate excellent and comparable efficacy, safety, and predictability at 3 months, but TG-LASIK offers faster postoperative visual recovery at 1 day and 1 week. TG-LASIK induces fewer HOAs than SMILE, but both procedures affect corneal biomechanics similarly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincialTrials.gov identifier, NCT05611294.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study investigated whether websites regarding diabetic retinopathy are readable for patients, and adequately designed to be found by search engines. METHODS: The term "diabetic retinopathy" was queried in the Google search engine. Patient-oriented websites from the first 10 pages were categorized by search result page number and website organization type. Metrics of search engine optimization (SEO) and readability were then calculated. RESULTS: Among the 71 sites meeting inclusion criteria, informational and organizational sites were best optimized for search engines, and informational sites were the most visited. Better optimization as measured by authority score was correlated with lower Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (r = 0.267, P = 0.024). There was a significant increase in Flesch Kincaid Grade Level with successive search result pages (r = 0.275, P = 0.020). Only 2 sites met the 6th grade reading level AMA recommendation by Flesch Kincaid Grade Level; the average reading level was 10.5. There was no significant difference in readability between website categories. CONCLUSION: While the readability of diabetic retinopathy patient information was poor, better readability was correlated to better SEO metrics. While we cannot assess causality, we recommend websites improve their readability, which may increase uptake of their resources.
