方法：回顾性病例系列研究。统计同期接受角膜屈光手术的778例1 556眼(VisuMax飞秒激光组即A组384例768眼，SBK角膜板层刀组即B组394例788眼)，对比术中舒适度评分、角膜瓣相关并发症、角膜瓣切口出血、球结膜下出血的发生率，评价两种方法的舒适性与安全性。

结果：术中舒适度方面，感觉极不舒适，难以忍受者A组5例(1.3%)，B组28例(7.1%)； 术中角膜瓣切口出血A组4眼(0.5%)，B组74眼(9.4%)； 球结膜下出血A组18眼(2.3%)，B组82眼(10.4%)； 角膜瓣边缘不齐A组0眼(0)，B组94(11.9%)； A组有4眼(0.5%)出现角膜瓣上皮部分剥脱，但未影响成功掀瓣及手术，A组有53眼(6.9%)发生角膜层间气泡(OBL)。两组无其它相关并发症。

结论：两种方法安全可靠，均无严重影响术后视觉质量的角膜瓣相关并发症。

METHODS:This retrospective case series study included 1 556 eyes of 778 consecutive patients. The eyes were assigned to two groups according to the method of the corneal flap made. VisuMax femtosecond laser group(group A)included 768 eyes of 384 consecutive patients. Moria One Use-Plus SBK microkeratome group(group B)included 788 eyes of 394 consecutive patients. We compared the comfort score in the surgery, the incidence of the corneal flap-related complications, the corneal flap incision bleeding and the subconjunctival hemorrhage, in order to evaluate the comfort and security between the VisuMax femtosecond laser and the Moria One Use-Plus SBK microkeratome.

RESULTS:There were 5 patients(1.3%)feeling very uncomfortable and unbearable in group A while 28 patients(7.1%)feeling the same in group B. Four eyes(0.5%)occurred the intraoperative corneal flap incision bleeding in group A, while 74 eyes(9.4%)occurred in group B. The subconjunctival hemorrhage existed in 18 eyes(2.3%)in group A while the same situation happened to 82 eyes(10.4%)in group B. No eyes(0%)occurred corneal flap edge missing in group A, but 94 eyes(11.9%)occurred the symptom in group B. Four eyes(0.5%)of the corneal flap epithelial part exfoliated, however, that did not affect the successful flap surgery in group A. Fifty-three eyes(6.9%)occurred Opaque Bubble Layer(OBL)in group A. There was no other corneal flap-related complication.

CONCLUSION:The two methods are safe and reliable, and there are no corneal flap-related complications which seriously impact the visual quality after the surgery.