I will put my $0.02 here for what it’s worth.
In theory the structural integrity from SMILE should be better but independent in vivo research is needed. Dan Reinstein is a consultant for Zeiss.
SMILE has a lot of attractive features but sadly my evaluation from peers who used it and abandoned it is that outcomes are less predictable and take much longer to stabilise. The visumax laser is also not a good flap maker. It has been available outside the US for some years now but is not gaining traction.
Certainly the CEO of a large European refractive surgery company does not believe it has realistic potential. They tried hard to integrate it into their practice but failed and returned the machine.
I’d be interested to hear from those who have had a positive experience with the Visumax versus Alcon FS or Abbott iFS.
Answer by Emil Chynn:
I’ve done SMILE a few times in Europe
What’s the real benefit of a procedure that’s
Doesn’t correct astigmatism
Doesn’t correct hyperopia
Can’t correct CK?
That makes it’s effective parameters low myopia.
There are MDs in Europe performing smile and then a LASEK or PRK on top to get rid of cyl or HOA. Sounds nuts to me
From my POV it’s greatest asset is a good marketing name?
Or am I missing something here?
Emil William Chynn, MD, FACS, MBA
1st eye surgeon in NY to get LASIK himself (1999)
Performed 5,000 LASIKs from 1996-2002
Switched to non-invasive LASEK in 2003
Have performed more LASEKs than any MD in US