SMILE, surgical selection and complications
Key Takeaways
SMILE removes a lenticule and differs from flap-based ablation in anatomy and recovery.
Thickness and tissue-alteration ratios are risk markers rather than standalone guarantees of safety.
Interface inflammation, infection and ectasia require distinct diagnosis and treatment.
4. Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE)
Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) is an all-femtosecond intrastromal refractive procedure that eliminates both excimer photoablation and corneal flap creation.
Surgical Technique
Using a low-energy, high-frequency femtosecond laser (e.g., VisuMax, ), four sequential photodisruptive cuts are performed within the stroma:
- Refractive Lenticule Posterior Interface: The deeper cutting plane created from the periphery towards the centre, forming the posterior refractive surface.
- Lenticule Edge: A vertical cylindrical cut ( thick) defining the outer boundary of the lenticule.
- Refractive Lenticule Anterior Interface (Cap): The superficial lamellar plane created from the centre outwards, situated at a fixed depth of beneath the anterior epithelial surface.
- Side-Cut Entry Tunnel: A small, arcuate incision (typically at the 12 o'clock or superotemporal position).
- Manual dissection is performed using a dedicated pocket-separator spatula to free the anterior and posterior planes, followed by extraction of the intrastromal lenticule through the side cut with micro-forceps.
Biomechanical & Neurological Advantages
- Biomechanics: Anterior stromal lamellae contribute strongly to corneal strength. A small-incision lenticule procedure preserves more anterior continuity than a flap, but comparative clinical biomechanics are complex. Neither a fixed 60% strength attribution nor a guaranteed 40–50% LASIK loss applies to every eye. SMILE can still cause ectasia.
- Reduced Denervation Dry Eye: The sub-basal nerve plexus arises from long ciliary nerves entering mid-stroma and branching vertically into the sub-epithelial space. In LASIK, flap creation severs these nerves around of the circumference. SMILE generally causes less early nerve disruption than flap creation in comparative studies, but dry-eye outcomes vary. Pre-existing surface disease, technique and follow-up matter; dry eye and reduced sensation remain possible.
5. Preoperative Patient Selection & Ectasia Risk Stratification
Assess refractive stability, realistic goals, dry eye, corneal sensation, lid disease, pupil, binocular status and ocular comorbidity. Review topography and tomography, pachymetry distribution, contact-lens warpage, family history, atopy and rubbing. A normal anterior map alone does not establish safety.
The historical Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System considers topography, residual stromal bed, age, corneal thickness and refractive error. Its older scoring model does not replace modern tomography or establish universal safety for all procedures.
For LASIK, residual stromal bed (RSB) and percentage of tissue altered (PTA) are:
For CCT 510 micrometres, flap 110 and ablation 100, RSB is 300 micrometres and PTA is 41.2%. A PTA around or above 40% was associated with ectasia in particular LASIK studies. It is a risk marker, not a biological cliff or a validated identical threshold for PRK and SMILE. An RSB of 300 micrometres does not guarantee safety. In a concerning case, defer LASIK and reassess alternatives; PRK is not automatically safe in an ectatic cornea, and a phakic lens requires its own anatomical eligibility assessment.
Explain infection, haze, dry eye, residual error, regression, dysphotopsia and rare loss of best-corrected vision. Surgery changes optical correction but does not remove high-myopia retinal risk. Contact lenses, spectacles and no surgery remain legitimate choices.
6. Complications of Keratorefractive Surgery
Intraoperative Complications
- Suction Loss: If suction breaks during femtosecond flap creation, immediately stop laser delivery. If the cut has not crossed into the visual axis, suction can be re-established immediately. If suction breaks during a mechanical microkeratome pass, abort the procedure immediately, reposition the partial flap without laser ablation, and allow 3 to 6 months of healing before re-attempting.
- Free cap: Stop and assess tissue integrity and orientation. Replace the viable cap correctly and decide whether to defer ablation; completing ablation is not automatically safe after this complication.
- Buttonhole Flap: A central flap defect can occur during mechanical flap creation, with risk influenced by corneal shape and instrument factors. Abort the planned ablation and carefully reposition the flap. Reassess healing, topography and visual quality before considering further surgery. Later surface ablation may be considered in selected eyes, but neither a single keratometry cutoff nor a compulsory six-month PRK-with-MMC pathway applies to every defect.
- Opaque Bubble Layer (OBL): Femtosecond cavitation gas pockets escape anteriorly into the subepithelial or stromal space. Can interfere with excimer eye-tracking systems; surgery should be paused for 15–30 minutes until gas reabsorbs.
Postoperative Complications: Diffuse Lamellar Keratitis (DLK)
Diffuse Lamellar Keratitis ("Sands of the Sahara") is a sterile, non-infectious, diffuse inflammatory infiltrate of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMNs) confined strictly to the flap-stromal interface, appearing 1 to 5 days postoperatively. Etiologies include bacterial endotoxins on surgical instruments, microkeratome blade oils, or povidone-iodine entry.
| DLK Stage | Biomicroscopic Findings | Clinical Severity | Management Protocol |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 1 | Fine, white, granular "sandy" infiltrates in the flap periphery, sparing the visual axis | Mild; asymptomatic or mild foreign body sensation; BCVA unchanged | Intensive topical Prednisolone acetate 1% q1h; review in 24 hours |
| Grade 2 | Central spread without dense clumping | Moderate | Intensive topical steroids; consider systemic treatment by severity and reassess closely |
| Grade 3 | Dense central clumping, aggregated granular clusters, interface fluid; marked haze | Severe; prominent vision loss, photophobia, foreign body pain | Urgent flap lift and interface washout with copious BSS + intensive topical/oral steroids |
| Grade 4 | Stromal tissue loss and scarring | Urgent specialist review | Flap lifting may worsen tissue loss; individual management and later optical rehabilitation |
Caution
Dense central DLK requires urgent specialist treatment, often interface irrigation and intensive anti-inflammatory therapy after excluding infection. Grade 4 is not an automatic indication to lift a structurally compromised flap. Distinguish steroid-related pressure-induced interface fluid from inflammation: escalating steroids can worsen it.
Other Postoperative Complications
- Epithelial Ingrowth: Proliferation of epithelial cells into the interface (1–2% of microkeratome LASIK, higher in re-treatments). Staged as mild (peripheral, non-progressive; observe) versus clinically significant (advancing within 2 mm of visual axis, flap melting, foreign body sensation; requires surgical flap lift, mechanical scraping of bed and flap underside, alcohol application, and secure repositioning with sutures or fibrin glue).
- Infectious Keratitis: Early onset (days 1–3) is typically staphylococcal or streptococcal; delayed/atypical onset (weeks 2–4) is classically Mycobacterium chelonae, Nocardia, or fungi. Requires urgent sampling and intensive organism-directed treatment. A flap/interface infection often needs flap lifting and interface sampling or irrigation; select antimicrobial coverage with the corneal team, timing and culture findings rather than one compulsory combination.
A 23-year-old patient with normal corneal topography and a central corneal thickness (CCT) of 510 µm is evaluated for myopic LASIK. The planned treatment entails a femtosecond flap thickness of 110 µm and an excimer ablation depth of 105 µm. What is the Percentage of Tissue Altered (PTA) and the appropriate surgical recommendation?
PTA is 35.3%; the patient is well within safe limits and LASIK may proceed without modification
PTA is 42.2%; defer this concerning LASIK plan and perform a full ectasia-risk and alternatives assessment
PTA is 38.2%; the patient is at low risk, though PRK is marginally preferred
PTA is 48.5%; the patient has breached the absolute residual stromal bed limit of 250 µm and is contraindicated for all refractive surgery
On postoperative day 3 following uneventful bilateral femtosecond LASIK, a 32-year-old patient presents with blurred vision and photophobia in the right eye. Slit-lamp biomicroscopy reveals dense, aggregated, clumping granular white infiltrates in the central flap interface with early central stromal haze and visual acuity reduced to 20/60. What is the diagnosis and definitive management?
Epithelial ingrowth; perform immediate Nd:YAG laser disruption of interface cells
Bacterial infectious keratitis; start topical fortified cefazolin and reassess in 48 hours
Grade 3 DLK: urgent specialist treatment, often interface irrigation and intensive anti-inflammatory therapy after excluding infection
Grade 1 Diffuse Lamellar Keratitis; prescribe topical fluorometholone 0.1% drops four times daily
Sections you finish are checked off in the contents.