低、中、高度近视患者行SMILE的角膜切削精确性研究
周海涛,胡中立,刘巧莉,魏巧慧,徐杨扬,林蒙,许志强,胡亮,瞿佳
325027 温州医科大学眼视光学院 生物医学工程学院
Accuracy of Central Corneal Ablation in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for Low, Moderate and High Myopia
Haitao Zhou, Zhongli Hu, Qiaoli Liu, Qiaohui Wei, Yangyang Xu, Meng Lin, Zhiqiang Xu, Liang Hu,Jia Qu
School of Ophthalmology and Optometry, School of Biomedical Engineering, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
摘要 目的:研究不同近视程度患者飞秒激光小切口基质透镜取出术(SMILE)后中央角膜切削误差及其变化趋势,探讨不同近视程度对切削误差的影响。方法:回顾性病例对照研究。选取2017 年1-8 月于温州医科大学附属眼视光医院行SMILE的近视患者61 例(120 眼),将其按术前屈光度分为低度(24眼,-0.50 D≤低度近视≤-3.00 D)、中度(54眼,-3.00 D <中度近视≤-6.00 D)以及高度(42眼,高度近视> -6.00 D)近视组。于术前、术后1 个月、3 个月使用Sirius眼前节分析系统测量中央角膜厚度(CCT)并计算切削误差及中央角膜切削偏差率,其中切削误差定义为中央角膜实际切削厚度(A-CCT)与预测切削厚度(P-CCT)的差值(△CCT),中央角膜切削偏差率定义为△CCT 与P-CCT的比值。采用配对t检验、单因素方差分析、Kruskal-Wallis H检验以及Pearson相关分析对数据进行分
析。结果:各组患者中央角膜实际切削厚度均小于预测切削厚度;术后1 个月和3 个月各组间△CCT差异有统计学意义(F=21.047、35.100,均P < 0.001);各组间中央角膜切削偏差率差异无统计学意义。在末次检查时,其中低、中、高度近视组△CCT分别为(-8.9±5.0)μm、(-15.6±6.2)μm、(-21.4±5.9)μm,3 组A-CCT与P-CCT差异均有统计学意义(t =8.67、18.50、23.65,P < 0.001)。术后切削误差与术前屈光度、切削直径呈正相关(r =0.649、0.384,均P < 0.001),与术前CCT呈负相关(r=-0.219,P=0.016)。结论:各近视组A-CCT均小于P-CCT;不同近视患者SMILE手术后中央角膜切削误差随着近视程度的增大而增大,但各组间中央角膜切削偏差率保持一致。
关键词 :
飞秒激光小切口基质透镜取出术 ,
中央角膜切削误差 ,
近视 ,
切削偏差率 ,
精确性
Abstract :Objective: To study ablation error and its central corneal thickness variations in patients with myopia after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), and to investigate the influence of low, moderate and high myopia on central corneal ablation error. Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study. Sixty-one myopic patients (a total of 120 eyes) who had undergone SMILE surgery from January 2017 to August 2017 at the Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University were chosen for the study. Data were organized by refractive status into low (24 eyes, -0.50 D≤low myopia≤-3.00 D), moderate (54 eyes, -3.00 D < moderate myopia ≤-6.00 D), and high (42 eyes, high myopia > -6.00 D) myopia groups. The central corneal thickness (CCT) of patients undergoing SMILE was measured by the Sirius anterior segment analysis system preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 month and 3 months. Among different myopia groups, the ablation error was calculated simultaneously during each visit and was defined as the difference (△CCT) between actual central corneal ablation thickness (A-CCT) and the predicted central corneal thickness (P-CCT). The difference ratio of △CCT (defined as △CCT/P-CCT) and the relationship (in diopters) between △CCT, CCT, and ablation diameter were analyzed. Data were analyzed with a paired-samples t-test, ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis H test, and Pearson correlation analysis. Results: Among the three myopia groups, results for A-CCT were all less than the P-CCT, and the differences in △CCT between any two groups were found to be statistically significant (F=21.047, 35.100, all P < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the difference ratios of △CCT among the three groups. The △CCTs of the low, moderate, and high myopia groups were -8.9 ± 5.0 μm, -15.6 ± 6.2 μm, -21.4 ± 5.9 μm, respectively. The differences between A-CCT and P-CCT were significant (t=8.67, 18.50, 23.65,P < 0.001). Moreover, there were significant correlations both in the relationship of corneal ablation error with preoperative refractive status and ablation diameter after SMILE surgery (r=0.649, 0.384, all P < 0.001). However, SMILE surgical ablation error and preoperative corneal thickness had a negative correlation (r=-0.219, P=0.016). Conclusions: A-CCT in low, moderate and high myopia groups after SMILE surgery is less than the predicted thickness. △CCT increases as the degree of myopia increases. There are significant differences in △CCT between different myopia groups, nevertheless the difference ratio of △CCT basically remains consistent.
Key words :
small incision lenticule extraction
central corneal ablation error
myopia
ablation deviation ratio
accuracy
收稿日期: 2017-12-26
通讯作者:
瞿佳(ORCID:0000-0003-1678-966X),Email:jqu@wz.zj.cn
引用本文:
周海涛,胡中立,刘巧莉,魏巧慧,徐杨扬,林蒙,许志强,胡亮,瞿佳. 低、中、高度近视患者行SMILE的角膜切削精确性研究[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2018, 20(7): 414-419.
Haitao Zhou, Zhongli Hu, Qiaoli Liu, Qiaohui Wei, Yangyang Xu, Meng Lin, Zhiqiang Xu, Liang Hu,. Accuracy of Central Corneal Ablation in Small Incision Lenticule Extraction for Low, Moderate and High Myopia. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2018, 20(7): 414-419. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2018.07.005.
链接本文:
https://www.cjoovs.com/CN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2018.07.005. 或 https://www.cjoovs.com/CN/Y2018/V20/I7/414
[1]
Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Small incision lenticule
extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive
[1]
Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Small incision lenticule
surgery technique and clinical outcomes. Eye Vis (Lond), 2014,
1:
3. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-014-0003-1.
extraction (SMILE) history, fundamentals of a new refractive
[2]
Moshirfar M, McCaughey MV, Reinstein DZ, et al. Smallincision
surgery technique and clinical outcomes. Eye Vis (Lond), 2014,
1:
3. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-014-0003-1.
lenticule extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015,
41
(3): 652-665. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.02.006.
[2]
Moshirfar M, McCaughey MV, Reinstein DZ, et al. Smallincision
[3]
Agca A, Ozgurhan EB, Demirok A, et al. Comparison of corneal
lenticule extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015,
41
(3): 652-665. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.02.006.
[3]
Agca A, Ozgurhan EB, Demirok A, et al. Comparison of corneal
hysteresis and corneal resistance factor after small incision
hysteresis and corneal resistance factor after small incision
lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK: A
lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK: A
prospective fellow eye study. Cont Lens Anterior Eye, 2014,
37
(2): 77-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2013.05.003.
prospective fellow eye study. Cont Lens Anterior Eye, 2014,
37
(2): 77-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2013.05.003.
[4]
Denoyer A, Landman E, Trinh L, et al. Dry eye disease after
[4]
Denoyer A, Landman E, Trinh L, et al. Dry eye disease after
refractive surgery: Comparative outcomes of small incision
lenticule extraction versus LASIK. Ophthalmology, 2015,
refractive surgery: Comparative outcomes of small incision
12
2(4): 669-676. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.10.004.
lenticule extraction versus LASIK. Ophthalmology, 2015,
12
2(4): 669-676. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.10.004.
[5]
Xu Y, Yang Y. Dry eye after small incision lenticule extraction
[5]
Xu Y, Yang Y. Dry eye after small incision lenticule extraction
and LASIK for myopia. J Refract Surg, 2014, 30(3): 186-190.
DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20140219-02.
and LASIK for myopia. J Refract Surg, 2014, 30(3): 186-190.
DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20140219-02.
[6]
Lee JK, Chuck RS, Park CY. Femtosecond laser refractive
[6]
Lee JK, Chuck RS, Park CY. Femtosecond laser refractive
surgery: Small-incision lenticule extraction vs. femtosecond
laser-assisted LASIK. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2015, 26(4): 260-
surgery: Small-incision lenticule extraction vs. femtosecond
26
4. DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000158.
[7]
Wang D, Liu M, Chen Y, et al. Differences in the corneal
laser-assisted LASIK. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2015, 26(4): 260-
26
4. DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000158.
biomechanical changes after SMILE and LASIK. J Refract Surg,
20
14, 30(10): 702-707. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20140903-09.
[7]
Wang D, Liu M, Chen Y, et al. Differences in the corneal
[8]
赵春焕, 郑坤坤, 梅波, 等. 飞秒激光制瓣的LASIK与SMILE
biomechanical changes after SMILE and LASIK. J Refract Surg,
20
14, 30(10): 702-707. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20140903-09.
[8]
赵春焕, 郑坤坤, 梅波, 等. 飞秒激光制瓣的LASIK与SMILE
术后干眼参数的Meta分析. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志,
20
16, 18(6): 347-352. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.
20
16.06.006.
术后干眼参数的Meta分析. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志,
20
16, 18(6): 347-352. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.
20
16.06.006.
[9]
Chansue E, Tanehsakdi M, Swasdibutra S, et al. Efficacy,
[9]
Chansue E, Tanehsakdi M, Swasdibutra S, et al. Efficacy,
predictability and safety of small incision lenticule extraction
(SMILE). Eye Vis (Lond), 2015, 2: 14. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-
predictability and safety of small incision lenticule extraction
01
5-0024-4.
(SMILE). Eye Vis (Lond), 2015, 2: 14. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-
[10]
Reinstein DZ, Carp GI, Archer TJ, et al. Outcomes of small
01
5-0024-4.
incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in low myopia. J Refract
[10]
Reinstein DZ, Carp GI, Archer TJ, et al. Outcomes of small
Surg, 2014, 30(12): 812-818. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20141113-07.
[11]
Piñero DP, Teus MA. Clinical outcomes of small-incision
incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in low myopia. J Refract
Surg, 2014, 30(12): 812-818. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20141113-07.
lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted wavefrontguided
[11]
Piñero DP, Teus MA. Clinical outcomes of small-incision
laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg,
20
16, 42(7): 1078-1093. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.05.004.
lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted wavefrontguided
[12]
Zhang J, Wang Y, Chen X. Comparison of moderate- to highastigmatism
laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg,
20
16, 42(7): 1078-1093. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.05.004.
[12]
Zhang J, Wang Y, Chen X. Comparison of moderate- to highastigmatism
corrections using wavefront-guided laser In situ
corrections using wavefront-guided laser In situ
keratomileusis and small-incision lenticule extraction. Cornea,
20
16, 35(4): 523-530. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000782.
keratomileusis and small-incision lenticule extraction. Cornea,
20
16, 35(4): 523-530. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000782.
[13]
Ye MJ, Liu CY, Liao RF, et al. SMILE and wavefrontguided
[13]
Ye MJ, Liu CY, Liao RF, et al. SMILE and wavefrontguided
LASIK out-compete other refractive surgeries in
LASIK out-compete other refractive surgeries in
ameliorating the induction of high-order aberrations in
anterior corneal surface. J Ophthalmol, 2016, 8702162. DOI:
10
1155/2016/8702162.
ameliorating the induction of high-order aberrations in
anterior corneal surface. J Ophthalmol, 2016, 8702162. DOI:
[14]
Khalifa MA, Ghoneim A, Shafik SM, et al. Comparative
10
1155/2016/8702162.
[14]
Khalifa MA, Ghoneim A, Shafik SM, et al. Comparative
analysis of the clinical outcomes of SMILE and wavefrontguided
LASIK in low and moderate myopia. J Refract Surg,
analysis of the clinical outcomes of SMILE and wavefrontguided
20
17, 33(5): 298-304. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20170222-01.
LASIK in low and moderate myopia. J Refract Surg,
20
17, 33(5): 298-304. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20170222-01.
[15]
胡亮, 王勤美. 三种全激光角膜屈光手术技术要点与前景. 中华
眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2016, 18(4): 193-198. DOI: 10.3760/
[15]
胡亮, 王勤美. 三种全激光角膜屈光手术技术要点与前景. 中华
cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2016.04.001.
眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2016, 18(4): 193-198. DOI: 10.3760/
[16]
Alió DBJL, Vargas V, Al-Shymali O, et al. Small incision
cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2016.04.001.
lenticule extraction (SMILE) in the correction of myopic
[16]
Alió DBJL, Vargas V, Al-Shymali O, et al. Small incision
astigmatism: outcomes and limitations-an update. Eye Vis
(Lond), 2017, 4: 26. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-017-0091-9.
lenticule extraction (SMILE) in the correction of myopic
astigmatism: outcomes and limitations-an update. Eye Vis
[17]
Kanellopoulos AJ. Topography-guided LASIK versus small
(Lond), 2017, 4: 26. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-017-0091-9.
incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for myopia and myopic
[17]
Kanellopoulos AJ. Topography-guided LASIK versus small
astigmatism: A randomized, prospective, contralateral eye study.
incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) for myopia and myopic
J Refract Surg, 2017, 33(5): 306-312. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-
astigmatism: A randomized, prospective, contralateral eye study.
20
170221-01.
J Refract Surg, 2017, 33(5): 306-312. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-
[18]
Ivarsen A, Asp S, Hjortdal J. Safety and complications of
20
170221-01.
more than 1 500 small-incision lenticule extraction procedures.
Ophthalmology, 2014, 121(4): 822-828. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.
[18]
Ivarsen A, Asp S, Hjortdal J. Safety and complications of
more than 1 500 small-incision lenticule extraction procedures.
Ophthalmology, 2014, 121(4): 822-828. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.
20
13.11.006.
[19]
Chansue E, Tanehsakdi M, Swasdibutra S, et al. Safety and
20
13.11.006.
[19]
Chansue E, Tanehsakdi M, Swasdibutra S, et al. Safety and
efficacy of VisuMax® circle patterns for flap creation and
efficacy of VisuMax® circle patterns for flap creation and
enhancement following small incision lenticule extraction. Eye
Vis (Lond), 2015, 2: 21. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-015-0031-5.
[20]
Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Lenticule thickness readout
enhancement following small incision lenticule extraction. Eye
Vis (Lond), 2015, 2: 21. DOI: 10.1186/s40662-015-0031-5.
[20]
Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M. Lenticule thickness readout
for small incision lenticule extraction compared to artemis threedimensional
for small incision lenticule extraction compared to artemis threedimensional
very high-frequency digital ultrasound stromal
measurements. J Refract Surg, 2014, 30(5): 304-309. DOI:
very high-frequency digital ultrasound stromal
measurements. J Refract Surg, 2014, 30(5): 304-309. DOI:
10
3928/1081597X-20140416-01.
10
3928/1081597X-20140416-01.
[21]
Luft N, Priglinger SG, Ring MH, et al. Stromal remodeling and
[21]
Luft N, Priglinger SG, Ring MH, et al. Stromal remodeling and
lenticule thickness accuracy in small-incision lenticule extraction:
One-year results. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2017, 43(6): 812-818.
lenticule thickness accuracy in small-incision lenticule extraction:
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.038.
[22]
徐雯, 周跃华, 张丽, 等. SMILE与FS-LASIK对近视眼角膜基
One-year results. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2017, 43(6): 812-818.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.038.
质切削深度可预测性的比较. 中华实验眼科杂志, 2017, 35(6):
[22]
徐雯, 周跃华, 张丽, 等. SMILE与FS-LASIK对近视眼角膜基
53
2-536. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-0160.2017.06.010.
质切削深度可预测性的比较. 中华实验眼科杂志, 2017, 35(6):
53
2-536. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-0160.2017.06.010.
[23]
Luft N, Ring MH, Dirisamer M, et al. Corneal epithelial
remodeling induced by small incision lenticule extraction
[23]
Luft N, Ring MH, Dirisamer M, et al. Corneal epithelial
remodeling induced by small incision lenticule extraction
(SMILE). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2016, 57(9): 176-183.
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-18879.
[24]
Ganesh S, Brar S, Relekar KJ. Epithelial thickness profile
(SMILE). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2016, 57(9): 176-183.
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-18879.
changes following small incision refractive lenticule extraction
[24]
Ganesh S, Brar S, Relekar KJ. Epithelial thickness profile
(SMILE) for myopia and myopic astigmatism. J Refract Surg,
changes following small incision refractive lenticule extraction
20
16, 32(7): 473-482. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20160512-01.
[25]
汤勇, 刘才远. LASIK、Epi-LASIK、SBK、Fem-LASIK及
(SMILE) for myopia and myopic astigmatism. J Refract Surg,
20
16, 32(7): 473-482. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20160512-01.
SMILE术中角膜切削误差的对比研究. 眼科新进展, 2013,
[25]
汤勇, 刘才远. LASIK、Epi-LASIK、SBK、Fem-LASIK及
(9)
: 851-854.
SMILE术中角膜切削误差的对比研究. 眼科新进展, 2013,
(9)
: 851-854.
[26]
张欣, 龚向明, 许丽英, 等. 正常眼一日内角膜厚度变化. 中国
[26]
张欣, 龚向明, 许丽英, 等. 正常眼一日内角膜厚度变化. 中国
实用眼科杂志, 1996, 14(9): 560-561.
实用眼科杂志, 1996, 14(9): 560-561.
[27]
杨凤, 黄锦海, 徐真, 等. 新型三维眼前节分析仪Sirius与A型
[27]
杨凤, 黄锦海, 徐真, 等. 新型三维眼前节分析仪Sirius与A型
超声测厚仪测角膜厚度比较分析. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013,
31
(5): 582-586. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-4443.2013.05.019.
超声测厚仪测角膜厚度比较分析. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013,
31
(5): 582-586. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-4443.2013.05.019.
[28]
张玙, 晏丕松, 杜之渝,等. Sirius与A超测量中央角膜厚度
对比研究. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013, 31(4): 412-416. DOI:
[28]
张玙, 晏丕松, 杜之渝,等. Sirius与A超测量中央角膜厚度
对比研究. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2013, 31(4): 412-416. DOI:
10
3760/cma.j.issn.10064443.2013.04.009.
10
3760/cma.j.issn.10064443.2013.04.009.
[29]
邱乐梅, 王顺清, 张小兰, 等. Sirius眼前节分析系统与A型超
[29]
邱乐梅, 王顺清, 张小兰, 等. Sirius眼前节分析系统与A型超
声测厚仪对中央角厚度测量结果的对照分析. 临床眼科杂志,
20
12, 20(3): 202-204. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8422.2012.03.004.
声测厚仪对中央角厚度测量结果的对照分析. 临床眼科杂志,
20
12, 20(3): 202-204. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8422.2012.03.004.
[1]
中华医学会眼科学分会眼视光学组, 中国医师协会眼科医师分会眼视光专业委员会, 中国非公立医疗机构协会眼科专业委员会视光学组, 等. 应用于近视控制的多焦软镜验配专家共识(2023) [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(8): 561-567.
[2]
江流, 王虹, 严双琴, 等. 7种儿童常用近视筛查方案的准确性比较 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(8): 601-606.
[3]
佳琦, 张亚琼, 孟雪雨, 等. 2013—2022年病理性近视研究现状和热点的可视化文献计量学分析 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(8): 617-622.
[4]
魏丽, 王铭, 于世傲, 等. 离焦设计框架眼镜和角膜塑形镜控制近视儿童眼轴延长的疗效比较 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(7): 506-511.
[5]
杨雪莉, 陈尧, 关宇欣, 等. 睡眠剥夺对豚鼠离焦性近视及视网膜多巴胺代谢的影响 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(7): 499-505.
[6]
中华医学会眼科学分会眼视光学组,中国医师协会眼科医师分会眼视光专业委员会,中国非公立医疗机构协会眼科专业委员会视光学组,等. 高度近视防控专家共识(2023) [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(6): 401-407.
[7]
陈思童, 孙丽媛, 王凯, 等. 妥拉唑啉控制雏鸡实验性近视进展的有效性和安全性 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(6): 420-426.
[8]
田彩霞, 王雁, 张佳媚. 不同切口SMILE对近视散光矫正影响的矢量分析 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(5): 347-353.
[9]
刘珠珠, 魏瑞华. 周边离焦软性角膜接触镜对儿童青少年近视控制效果的研究进展 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(5): 391-395.
[10]
李予靖, 范玉琢, 赵恒, 等. CRT角膜塑形镜短期内镜片参数调整原因及调整效果分析 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(4): 246-251.
[11]
吴晋芳, 章培培, 包芳军, 等. 眼基线参数对角膜塑形镜设计及其临床效果的影响 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(4): 241-245.
[12]
温丹丹, 蔡圆圆, 刘倩倩, 等. 2021年温州市中小学生近视流行现状及相关影响因素 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(4): 291-297.
[13]
何笑英, 韩伟. 角膜屈光手术中影响高阶像差的因素 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(3): 235-240.
[14]
刘新婷, 许梅萍, 邓若云, 等. 0.01%硫酸阿托品滴眼液降低儿童青少年近距离用眼引起的短暂性近视的有效性和安全性 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(3): 182-187.
[15]
杨哲, 夏丽坤. SMILE矫正高度近视及散光术后功能性光学区的变化 [J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2023, 25(3): 188-194.