Cited by 57Corneal surgery and disordersCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsOcular Infections and Treatments

Dissection plane in deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty using the big-bubble technique

Jafarinasab, Mohammad Reza, Rahmati-Kamel, Mohsen, Kanavi, Mozhgan Rezaei, Feizi, Sepehr·2010·Cornea

Abstract

Purpose To find the level of dissection in keratoconic corneas undergoing deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) using the big-bubble technique. Methods In 3 keratoconic eyes that underwent DALK, the operation was converted into penetrating keratoplasty after complete big-bubble formation because of extensive tear in Descemet's membrane (DM) during stromal excision. The corneal stroma and DM taken from these eyes were submitted for light and transmission electron microscopy. Results Both light and transmission electron microscope revealed a thin layer of corneal stroma adhered to DM in all cases. In 2 eyes, the residual stromal thickness was almost constant (6.4 μm and 12.3 μm), whereas it varied from 9.5 μm to 25.8 μm in the other one. Conclusion Dissection plane in DALK using the big-bubble technique can be within corneal stroma rather than exactly between stroma and DM. Various corneal pathologies as well as different techniques of dissection may have influence on this level.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ico.0b013e3181ba7016

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When a so-called big bubble is induced during pneumodissection, part of the posterior stroma often adheres to Descemet's membrane, indicating a natural cleavage plane in the stroma about 10 μm above Descemet's membrane.

    “when a so-called “big bubble” is induced, part of the posterior stroma often adheres to the Descemet's membrane, and that there is, therefore, a natural cleavage plane in the stroma about 10 μm above Descemet's membrane (Jafarinasab et al., 2010, McKee et al., 2011).”

    From Corneal structure and transparency (2015) · cites this paper as Jafarinasab et al., 2010

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jafarinasab, M. R., Rahmati-Kamel, M., Kanavi, M. R., & Feizi, S.
Affiliations
Hospital Labbafinejad (IR)
Venue
Cornea
Published
2010-04
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
388-391
ISSN
0277-3740 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1972397860
Cited by
57
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cornea (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Corneal surgery and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Corneal Surgery and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Infections and Treatments
Keywords
deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty, big bubble technique, dissection plane, keratoconus, Descemet's membrane, corneal stroma, residual stromal thickness
MeSH terms
Adult, Corneal Stroma, Descemet Membrane, Dissection, Humans, Keratoconus, Keratoplasty, Penetrating, Corneal Transplantation, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review