Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

A randomized controlled trial comparing femtosecond-enabled deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty and standard deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (FEDS Study)

Eye volume 37, pages 2693–2699 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objectives

To compare outcomes of femtosecond-enabled deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (FE-DALK) and standard deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (S-DALK).

Methods

An open label, randomized controlled trial (Kensington Eye Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada) including 100 eyes of 97 participants with either keratoconus or corneal scarring, randomized to either FE-DALK (n = 48) or S-DALK (n = 49). Primary outcomes: postoperative astigmatism and surgically induced corneal astigmatism (SIA) – both at 15 months. Secondary outcomes: 6-, 12- and 15-month postoperative uncorrected- and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, steep and flat keratometry, manifest sphere and astigmatism, rate of conversion to penetrating keratoplasty (PK), big-bubble success, central corneal thickness, endothelial cell count and complications.

Results

In intention-to-treat analysis, mean postoperative astigmatism in the FE-DALK (n = 30) and S-DALK (n = 30) groups at 15 months was 7.8 ± 4.4 D and 6.3 ± 5.0 D, respectively (p = 0.282) with an adjusted mean difference of 1.3 D (95% CI −1.08, +3.65). Mean SIA (arithmetic) was 9.2 ± 7.8 and 8.8 ± 5.4 D, respectively (p = 0.838) with a mean difference of 0.4 D (95% CI −3.13, +3.85). In an analysis of successful DALK cases only, mean postoperative astigmatism in the FE-DALK (n = 24) and S-DALK (n = 20) groups at 15 months (after excluding 4 eyes with AEs) was 7.3 ± 4.4 and 6.2 ± 4.9 D, respectively (p = 0.531) with an adjusted mean difference of 0.9 D (95% CI −1.94, +3.71). Mean SIA (arithmetic) was 9.1 ± 7.8 and 7.9 ± 4.6 D, respectively (p = 0.547) with a mean difference of 1.2 D (95% CI −2.70,+5.02). Comparison of secondary outcomes showed only weak statistical evidence.

Conclusions

In this randomized controlled trial, FE-DALK and S-DALK showed comparable functional and anatomical outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Femtosecond laser settings for the creation of a full-thickness mushroom configuration in the donor cornea.
Fig. 2: Femtosecond laser settings for the creation of a partial thickness mushroom configuration in the recipient cornea.
Fig. 3: CONSORT Flow Diagram.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available to protect individual privacy but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request following the approval of the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board.

References

  1. Shimmura S, Tsubota K. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17:349–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tan DTH, Mehta JS. Future directions in lamellar corneal transplantation. Cornea. 2007;26:S21–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Reinhart WJ, Musch DC, Jacobs DS, Lee WB, Kaufman SC, Shtein RM. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty as an alternative to penetrating keratoplasty a report by the american academy of ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:209–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Archila EA. Deep lamellar keratoplasty dissection of host tissue with intrastromal air injection. Cornea. 1984;3:217–8.

  5. Gaster RN, Dumitrascu O, Rabinowitz YS. Penetrating keratoplasty using femtosecond laser-enabled keratoplasty with zig-zag incisions versus a mechanical trephine in patients with keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96:1195–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kamiya K, Kobashi H, Shimizu K, Igarashi A. Clinical outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty performed with the VisuMax femtosecond laser system and comparison with conventional penetrating keratoplasty. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Alio JL, Abdelghany AA, Barraquer R, Hammouda LM, Sabry AM. Femtosecond laser assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty outcomes and healing patterns compared to manual technique. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:397891.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Li S, Wang T, Bian J, Wang F, Han S, Shi W. Precisely controlled side cut in femtosecond laser-assisted deep lamellar keratoplasty for advanced keratoconus. Cornea. 2016;35:1289–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shehadeh-Mashor R, Chan CC, Bahar I, Lichtinger A, Yeung SN, Rootman DS. Comparison between femtosecond laser mushroom configuration and manual trephine straight-edge configuration deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014;98:35–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan CC, Ritenour RJ, Kumar NL, Sansanayudh W, Rootman DS. Femtosecond laser-assisted mushroom configuration deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Cornea. 2010;29:290–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Anwar M, Teichmann KD. Big-bubble technique to bare Descemet’s membrane in anterior lamellar keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28:398–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Melles GR, Lander F, Rietveld FJ, Remeijer L, Beekhuis WH, Binder PS. A new surgical technique for deep stromal, anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:327–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Shehadeh-Mashor R, Chan C, Yeung SN, Lichtinger A, Amiran M, Rootman DS. Long-term outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted mushroom configuration deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Cornea. 2013;32:390–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Alpins NA, Goggin M. Practical astigmatism analysis for refractive outcomes in cataract and refractive surgery. Surv Ophthalmol. 2004;49:109–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, Lepage L. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:657–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Liu YC, Wittwer VV, Yusoff NZM, Lwin CN, Seah XY, Mehta JS, et al. Intraoperative optical coherence tomography-guided femtosecond laser-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Cornea. 2019;38:648–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guindolet D, Nguyen DT, Bergin C, Doan S, Cochereau I, Gabison EE. Double-docking technique for femtosecond laser-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Cornea. 2018;37:123–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gogri PY, Bore MC, Rips AGT, Reddy JC, Rostov AT, Vaddavalli PK. Femtosecond laser-assisted big bubble for deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2021;47:106–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lucisano A, Giannaccare G, Pellegrini M, Bernabei F, Yu AC, Carnevali A, et al. Preliminary results of a novel standardized technique of femtosecond laser-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty for keratoconus. J Ophthalmol. 2020;2020:5496162.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Yoo SH, Hurmeric V. Femtosecond laser-assisted keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151:189–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Deshmukh R, Stevenson LJ, Vajpayee RB. Laser-assisted corneal transplantation surgery. Surv Ophthalmol. 2021;66:826–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Professor Noel Alpins for his assistance and guidance in the planning of vector analysis in the study, and Ms. Fei Zuo for her assistance in data analysis.

Funding

This study is funded by Kensington Research Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Nir Sorkin, Wendy Hatch, Michael Mimouni, Hall F. Chew, David S. Rootman, Allan R. Slomovic, Matthew C. Bujak, Clara C. Chan, Mauricio Perez & Neera Singal

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Medical Center and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Nir Sorkin

  3. Kensington Eye Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Wendy Hatch, Vera Stiuso & Neera Singal

  4. Department of Ophthalmology, Rambam Health Care Campus affiliated with the Bruce and Ruth Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

    Michael Mimouni

  5. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Kevin E. Thorpe

  6. Applied Health Research Centre (AHRC), Toronto, ON, Canada

    Kevin E. Thorpe

Authors
  1. Nir Sorkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wendy Hatch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Mimouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hall F. Chew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David S. Rootman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Allan R. Slomovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Matthew C. Bujak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Clara C. Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kevin E. Thorpe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Mauricio Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Vera Stiuso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Neera Singal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NSo was responsible for designing the study, drafting the protocol, analysis planning, interpreting results, and drafting the manuscript. WH was responsible for designing the study, drafting the protocol, recruiting participants, collecting data, interpreting results, and revising the manuscript. MM was responsible for analysis planning, interpreting results and revising the manuscript. HFC was responsible for recruiting participants, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. DSR was responsible for recruiting participants, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. ARS was responsible for recruiting participants, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. MCB was responsible for recruiting participants, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. CCC was responsible for recruiting participants, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. KET was responsible for analysis planning, performing the analysis, interpreting results, and revising the manuscript. MP was responsible for designing the study, drafting the protocol, and revising the manuscript. VS was responsible for recruiting participants, conducting follow-up testing, collecting data, and revising the manuscript. NSi was responsible for designing the study, analysis planning, drafting the protocol, supervising study procedures, recruiting participants, collecting data, interpreting results, and revising the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nir Sorkin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sorkin, N., Hatch, W., Mimouni, M. et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing femtosecond-enabled deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty and standard deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (FEDS Study). Eye 37, 2693–2699 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-023-02387-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-023-02387-1

Search

Advanced search

Quick links