Comparison of femtosecond laser assistance and manual trephination in deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty in the treatment of keratoconus: a meta-analysis
Kaiyue Du,Enshuo Liu,Nan Li,Bowei Yuan,Rongmei Peng,Jing Hong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2023.08.003
IF: 5.488
2023-08-08
American Journal of Ophthalmology
Abstract:Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser–assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (F-DALK) with those of manual-trephination deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (M-DALK) in treating keratoconus. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Through November 2022, we comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases. Studies that involved comparisons between F-DALK and M-DALK groups and that reported on relevant efficacy and/or safety parameters were included. Primary outcomes were uncorrected- and corrected-distance visual acuity and intraoperative complication rates. Secondary outcomes were spherical equivalent, topographic astigmatism, refractive cylinder, mean keratometry, endothelial cell density, suture removal time, and postoperative complication rates. These data were analyzed using Cochrane Review Manager version 5.3. Results This meta-analysis included nine non-randomized controlled studies involving 1713 eyes. In eyes treated with F-DALK, corrected-distance visual acuity at 1–6 months (WMD = −0.07; 95% CI, −0.10 to −0.03; I 2 = 0%, P < 0.001) after surgery was better and intraoperative Descemet membrane perforation occurred less often (OR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31–0.92; I 2 = 6%, P = 0.02) than in eyes treated with M-DALK. No clinically significant differences in other outcomes were found among the groups. Conclusions For keratoconus patients, both F-DALK and M-DALK are safe and efficacious. Compared with M-DALK, F-DALK can provide better early visual acuity and reduce the intraoperative perforation rate, and its likely improvements to long-term visual quality and endothelial cell preservation warrant further investigation. Additionally, the two techniques seem to be comparable regarding refractive outcomes and other complications.
ophthalmology