Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Ye's Swing Technique for Small-incision Lenticule Extraction Surgery
Published on: June 27, 2025
Clinical evaluation of a new correction algorithm for dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer tonometry before and after laser
Kai-Jung Chen1, Akram Joda1, Riccardo Vinciguerra1
1From the School of Engineering (Chen, Joda, Eliasy, Geraghty, Elsheikh), University of Liverpool and the St. Paul's Eye Unit (Vinciguerra), Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital, Liverpool, and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology (Elsheikh), Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom; the College of Engineering (Joda), King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Smile Eye Clinic (Sefat, Kook) and the Department of Ophthalmology (Kook), Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; the Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Science (Roberts), Department of Biomedical Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Purpose:
To compare a biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) algorithm provided by the dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer (Corvis ST) with Goldmann applanation tonometry IOP (Goldmann IOP) and standard dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer IOP measurements before and after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and refractive lenticule extraction small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgeries.
Setting:
Smile Eye Clinic, Munich, Germany, and University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Design:
Retrospective case series.
Methods:
Patients scheduled for LASIK and patients scheduled for small-incision lenticule extraction for myopia or myopic astigmatism were included. The preoperative and postoperative evaluations included Goldmann, Scheimpflug tomography, and dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer IOP measurements.
Results:
The study comprised 14 patients in the LASIK group and 22 patients in the small-incision lenticule extraction group. Preoperative Goldmann IOP and Scheimpflug analyzer IOP values showed significant positive correlation with central corneal thickness (CCT) (P = .05 for LASIK; P = .003 for small-incision lenticule extraction). No significant correlation was found between bIOP and CCT (P > .05). After both surgeries, there were significant decreases in Goldmann IOP (-3.2 mm Hg ± 3.4 [SD] and -3.2 ± 2.1 mm Hg, respectively; both P < .001) and Scheimpflug analyzer IOP (-3.7 ± 2.1 mm Hg and -3.3 ± 2.0 mm Hg, respectively, both P < .001) compared with preoperative readings, whereas bIOP did not differ significantly (0.1 ± 2.1 mm Hg and 0.8 ± 1.8 mm Hg, respectively; P = .80 and P = .273, respectively).
Conclusions:
The bIOP readings before and after LASIK and small-incision lenticule extraction were neither significantly different nor correlated with CCT. In contrast, both Goldmann IOP and Scheimpflug analyzer IOP had significant reductions postoperatively and showed significant correlation with CCT preoperatively.
Related Concept Videos
Distance Corrections
Power Factor Correction
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Irritable Bowel Syndrome II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Evaluation
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is classified into subtypes based on the predominant bowel habits as determined by the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS). The subtypes are:
NMR Spectrometers: Resolution and Error Correction

