title: Efficacy and safety of deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty vs. penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus: a meta-analysis.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate difference in therapeutic outcomes between deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) and penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) for the clinical treatment of keratoconus.
  
  
  METHODS
  A comprehensive search was conducted in Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of science. Eligible studies should include at least one of the following factors: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), postoperative spherical equivalent (SE), postoperative astigmatism and endothelial cell count (ECC), central corneal thickness (CCT), graft rejection and graft failure, of which BCVA, graft rejection and graft failure were used as the primary outcome measures, and postoperative SE, astigmatism, CCT and ECC as the secondary outcome measures. Given the lack of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), cohort studies and prospective studies were considered eligible.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Sixteen clinical trials involving 6625 eyes were included in this review, including 1185 eyes in DALK group, and 5440 eyes in PKP group. The outcomes were analyzed using Cochrane Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.0 software. The postoperative BCVA in DALK group was significantly better than that in PKP group (OR = 0.48; 95%CI 0.39 to 0.60; p<0.001). There were fewer cases of graft rejection in DALK group than those in PKP group (OR = 0.28; 95%CI 0.15 to 0.50; p<0.001). Nevertheless the rate of graft failure was similar between DALK and PKP groups (OR = 1.05; 95%CI 0.81 to 1.36; p = 0.73). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes of SE (p = 0.70), astigmatism (p = 0.14) and CCT (p = 0.58) between DALK and PKP groups. And ECC in DALK group was significantly higher than PKP group (p<0.001). The postoperative complications, high intraocular pressure (high-IOP) and cataract were analyzed, fewer cases of complications occurred in DALK group than those in PKP group (high-IOP, OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11-0.44, P<0.001) (cataract, OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.61, P = 0.004). And no cases of expulsive hemorrhage and endophthalmitis were reported.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The visual outcomes for DALK were not equivalent to PKP. The rate of graft failure was similar between DALK and PKP. Fewer postoperative complications occurred in DALK group, indicating that compared with PKP, DALK has lower efficacy but higher safety.
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Hao
authors: H
authors: Liu
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Yihui
authors: Y
authors: Chen
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Peng
authors: P
authors: Wang
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Bing
authors: B
authors: Li
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Weifang
authors: W
authors: Wang
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Yan
authors: Y
authors: Su
authors: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai tenth people's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China.
authors: Minjie
authors: M
authors: Sheng
mesh_terms: D016039:Corneal Transplantation / Q000379:methods*; D006084:Graft Rejection; D006801:Humans; D007640:Keratoconus / Q000601:surgery*; D015948:Keratoplasty, Penetrating / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 1999 May;127(5):600-2
references: 10334355
references: Cornea. 2000 May;19(3):329-32
references: 10832693
references: Ophthalmology. 2000 Jun;107(6):1125-31
references: 10857832
references: Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2000 Aug;11(4):217-23
references: 10977765
references: Cornea. 2000 Sep;19(5):611-6
references: 11009313
references: Br J Ophthalmol. 2001 Jul;85(7):788-91
references: 11423449
references: Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2001 Dec;29(6):345-51
references: 11778802
references: J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002 Mar;28(3):398-403
references: 11973083
references: Cornea. 2002 May;21(4):374-83
references: 11973386
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2002 Aug;134(2):159-65
references: 12140020
references: Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2002 Aug;13(4):224-9
references: 12165704
references: Cornea. 2003 Mar;22(2):111-3
references: 12605042
references: Ophthalmology. 2003 Jul;110(7):1396-402
references: 12867398
references: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Aug;44(8):3326-31
references: 12882777
references: Ophthalmology. 2004 Sep;111(9):1676-82
references: 15350322
references: Eye (Lond). 2006 May;20(5):527-32
references: 15877089
references: Cornea. 2005 Nov;24(8):941-6
references: 16227837
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2006 Feb;141(2):254-259
references: 16458677
references: Cornea. 2006 May;25(4):408-12
references: 16670476
references: Ophthalmology. 2006 Sep;113(9):1633-8
references: 16828503
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Jan;143(1):117-124
references: 17188045
references: Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2007 Sep;30(4):223-32
references: 17481941
references: Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2007 Dec;85(8):890-2
references: 17645421
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2008 Dec;146(6):905-12.e1
references: 18723138
references: Cornea. 2008 Oct;27(9):1062-5
references: 18812772
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 2009 May;127(5):649-55
references: 19433716
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 2009 Nov;148(5):744-751.e1
references: 19589495
references: BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2535
references: 19622551
references: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Dec;50(12):5625-9
references: 19661238
references: Cornea. 2010 Jan;29(1):53-9
references: 19770724
references: Cornea. 2010 Apr;29(4):365-71
references: 20168217
references: Eur J Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;25(9):603-5
references: 20652370
references: Int Ophthalmol. 2010 Dec;30(6):675-81
references: 20862520
references: Ophthalmology. 2011 Jan;118(1):209-18
references: 21199711
references: Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2011 Mar;55(2):93-7
references: 21400051
references: Can J Ophthalmol. 2011 Oct;46(5):403-7
references: 21995982
references: Ophthalmology. 2012 Feb;119(2):249-55
references: 22054997
references: JAMA. 2011 Dec 28;306(24):2715-6
references: 22203540
references: Indian J Ophthalmol. 2012 Jan-Feb;60(1):35-40
references: 22218243
references: Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 May;130(5):621-8
references: 22652847
references: Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 Aug;96(8):1063-7
references: 22718792
references: Cornea. 2013 Apr;32(4):e2-5
references: 22929159
references: Eye (Lond). 2013 Mar;27(3):329-39
references: 23258309
references: Int J Ophthalmol. 2012;5(6):737-41
references: 23275910
references: J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2013 May;14(5):438-50
references: 23645180
references: Korean J Ophthalmol. 2013 Oct;27(5):322-30
references: 24082769
references: Cornea. 2014 Jan;33(1):6-9
references: 24270676
references: Ophthalmology. 2014 May;121(5):979-87
references: 24491643
references: Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2014 May;126(9-10):286-90
references: 24700243
references: Cornea. 1987;6(4):298-305
references: 3319412
references: Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88
references: 3802833
references: Cornea. 1984-1985;3(3):217-8
references: 6399886
references: Am J Ophthalmol. 1993 Aug 15;116(2):207-11
references: 8352307
references: Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 Mar;81(3):184-8
references: 9135380
references: J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998 Jun;52(6):377-84
references: 9764259
references: Ophthalmology. 1998 Oct;105(10):1855-65
references: 9787355