Abstract:AIM: To compare the postoperative efficacy, safety, predictability, and visual quality of implantable collamer lens (ICL) implantation versus small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) in myopia eyes. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and several Chinese databases were searched at May 2021 to select relevant studies in comparison of clinical outcomes between ICL implantation and SMILE for myopia. The primary outcomes were efficacy, safety, and predictability. And the secondary outcomes were postoperative higher-order ocular aberrations (HOAs), modulation transfer function cutoff frequency (MTF), objective scatter index (OSI), contrast sensitivity and a quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 1036 eyes from 10 studies, of which 503 eyes underwent ICL implantation and 533 eyes underwent SMILE, were enrolled in this Meta-analysis. Pooled results revealed that ICL group had a better safety index and post-corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (P=0.007, <0.00001, respectively), and a lower percentage of eyes with a postoperative CDVA lost 1 line (P=0.007) than the SMILE group. No significant differences were found in comparison of the other primary outcomes. In the long-term follow-up (>6mo), ICL group had a lower total HOA, coma, and spherical aberration than SMILE group (P=0.003, <0.00001, 0.04). Yet higher trefoil was found in ICL group at 6mo after surgery (P=0.003). Additionally, ICL group also had a higher MTF value (P=0.02), and a higher contrast sensitivity score for spatial frequencies of 1.5, 6, and 12 cpds (P=0.02, 0.005, 0.02, respectively). And it also had a lower score of bothersome in QoV questionnaire than SMILE group (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: ICL implantation and SMILE have similar and comparable outcomes in term of the efficacy and predictability for correcting high myopia. However, ICL group is relatively safer and also has better visual quality in comparison of SMILE group.
