From the Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical, University, Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Science Key Laboratory, Beijing, China.
Exp Clin Transplant. 2020 Aug;18(4):417-428. doi: 10.6002/ect.2019.0123. Epub 2019 Nov 13.
In recent years, there have been rapid advances in the field of keratoconus. Penetrating keratoplasty and deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty are the standard surgical procedures. Nevertheless, controversy remains regarding the outcomes of both procedures in the treatment of keratoconus. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis comparing postoperative outcome measures of penetrating keratoplasty versus deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty for keratoconus.
We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for eligible studies comparing best-corrected visual acuity, spherical equivalent, refractive cylinder, topography cylinder, and graft rejection episodes and complications of penetrating keratoplasty and deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Seven risk domains from software Review Manager 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) were applied as quality assessments for the eligible studies. A random-effects model was used for data synthesis.
Thirteen eligible studies were included in our meta-analysis, which encompassed 530 eyes that underwent penetrating keratoplasty and 568 eyes that underwent deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. With regard to best-corrected visual acuity, refractive cylinder, and topography cylinder, we found no significant differences in results between the 2 procedures (P = .49 and .47, respectively). However, spherical equivalent results were significantly greater in the deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty group than in the penetrating keratoplasty group (P < .001). The risk of graft rejection episodes was more prominent in the penetrating keratoplasty than in the deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty group (odds ratio = 2.69; P = .001). The odds ratio for complications was 1.79 (P = .03). Three studies showed moderate risk of bias, and the other 10 showed high risk of bias.
Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty is preferred over penetrating keratoplasty for the treatment of keratoconus because of its low risk of rejection and complications.
近年来,圆锥角膜领域取得了快速进展。穿透性角膜移植术和深层前弹力层角膜切除术是标准的手术方法。然而,对于这两种手术方法在圆锥角膜治疗中的结果仍存在争议。因此,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,比较穿透性角膜移植术与深层前弹力层角膜切除术治疗圆锥角膜的术后结果测量指标。
我们检索了 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库,以获取比较穿透性角膜移植术和深层前弹力层角膜切除术治疗圆锥角膜的最佳矫正视力、球镜等效值、屈光性散光、角膜地形学散光和移植物排斥反应事件以及并发症的相关研究。使用 Review Manager 5.3 软件(Cochrane 协作网,英国牛津)的 7 个风险领域对纳入的研究进行质量评估。采用随机效应模型进行数据合并。
共有 13 项符合条件的研究纳入本荟萃分析,共纳入 530 只眼行穿透性角膜移植术和 568 只眼行深层前弹力层角膜切除术。在最佳矫正视力、屈光性散光和角膜地形学散光方面,我们发现这两种手术方法的结果没有显著差异(P =.49 和.47)。然而,深层前弹力层角膜切除术组的球镜等效值结果显著大于穿透性角膜移植术组(P <.001)。穿透性角膜移植术组的移植物排斥反应事件风险显著高于深层前弹力层角膜切除术组(比值比 = 2.69;P =.001)。并发症的比值比为 1.79(P =.03)。3 项研究显示存在中度偏倚风险,其余 10 项研究显示存在高度偏倚风险。
深层前弹力层角膜切除术治疗圆锥角膜的排斥和并发症风险较低,优于穿透性角膜移植术。