Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2025
Full-Field Optical Coherence Microscopy for Histology-Like Analysis of Stromal Features in Corneal Grafts
Published on: October 21, 2022
Comparison of visual outcomes, keratometric parameters and biomechanical profiles between deep anterior lamellar
Hossein Jamali1, Ramin Saluoti1, Mehrnoosh Maalhagh1
1Poostchi Ophthalmology Research Center, Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Objective:
Comparing results of two different DALK surgery techniques (big bubble vs. Melles) in patients with advanced keratoconus.
Design:
a retrospective comparative clinical study.
Participants:
This study conducted on 72 eyes of 72 participants.
Introduction:
This study designed to compare the results of two different DALK surgery techniques (big bubble vs. Melles) in patients with advanced keratoconus.
Method:
Thirty-seven eyes were treated using the big bubble DALK method, while 35 eyes were treated using the Melles approach. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected spectacle visual acuity (BCSVA), manifest refraction, keratometric characteristics, contrast sensitivity, corneal aberrations, corneal biomechanical characteristics, and endothelial cell profile are the outcome measurements.
Results:
Mean UCVA in big bubble group was 0.61 ± 25 LogMAR and in Melles group was 0.89 ± 0.41 LogMAR (p-value 0.043). Mean BCSVA in big bubble group (0.18 ± 0.12 Log MAR) was significantly better than Melles group (0.35 ± 0.16 Log MAR). Mean of sphere and cylinder refraction showed no significant difference between two groups. Comparing the endothelial cell profile, corneal aberrations, corneal biomechanical properties and keratometry had no significantdifferences. Contrast sensitivity reported as modulation transfer function (MTF) showed higher values in big bubble group and differences with Melles group weresignificant. Results of point spread function (PSF) in big bubble group had superiority to Melles group with considerable statistical P value of 0.023.
Conclusion:
When opposed to the Melles approach, the big bubble technique generates a smooth interface with less stromal residue, which results in higher visual quality and contrast sensitivity.
