Cochrane · systematic review · CD012946
Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome compared to LASIK with a femtosecond laser for LASIK in adults with myopia or myopic astigmatism
Kahuam-López, N, Navas, A, Castillo-Salgado, C, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
Eyes and VisionAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 28.6%Low 5 · 71.4%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome compared to LASIK with a femtosecond laser for LASIK in adults with myopia or myopic astigmatism
Population: adults (18 years) with more than 0.5 diopters of myopia or myopic astigmatism
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mean UCVA, 12 months after surgery (unit LogMAR) Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 42 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of eyes within ± 0.5 diopters of target refraction, 12 months after surgery (unit diopters) Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | RR 0.97 [0.85, 1.11] | 1 study · 79 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Mean spherical equivalent of the refractive error, 12 months after surgery (unit diopters) Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 168 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Corneal haze, any time point Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | RR 0.33 [0.01, 7.96] | 1 study · 86 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Dry eye, any time point Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | RR 5.74 [2.92, 11.29] | 1 study · 183 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Diffuse lamellar keratitis, any time point Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | RR 0.27 [0.1, 0.78] | 3 studies · 134 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Epithelial ingrowth, any time point Laser‐assisted in‐situ keratomileusis (LASIK) with a mechanical microkeratome vs LASIK with a femtosecond laser | RR 1.04 [0.11, 9.42] | 2 studies · 102 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |