Gebauer SLc Original and Moria One‐Use Plus automated microkeratomes for ultrathin Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty preparation

Abstract

The SLc and the OUP system are both suited for the preparation of UT-DSAEK lamellae. Neither system differed significantly in variability, LSR or ECL, which did not increase during a 6-day incubation period.

Preparation of endothelial keratoplasty lenticules with Gebauer SLc Original versus Moria CBm Carriazo-Barraquer and Moria One-Use Plus microkeratomes

“…These results were similar to those reported by Fuest et al . [ 11 12 ] except that the endothelial keratoplasty lenticules in their series were dissected only from corneoscleral buttons, not from fresh whole eyes. The superiority of the SLc system over OUP in this regard may be due to the use of a transparent visual applanation plate in SLc for setting the desired cutting diameter.…”

“…[ 9 10 ] Hand-guided Moria Carriazo-Barraquer (CBm) and fully automatic systems such as Gebauer SLc Original (SLc) and Moria One-Use Plus (OUP) are suitable systems that are being used for the standard preparation of DSAEK tissues. [ 11 12 ] Although multiple factors can influence the thickness of provided DSAEK lamellae,[ 13 14 15 ] the SLc system excepting its more agreement with the selected cutting depth was comparable with the CBm and OUP in terms of variability, lamellar surface roughness, or endothelial cell loss. [ 11 12 ]…”

“…[ 11 12 ] Although multiple factors can influence the thickness of provided DSAEK lamellae,[ 13 14 15 ] the SLc system excepting its more agreement with the selected cutting depth was comparable with the CBm and OUP in terms of variability, lamellar surface roughness, or endothelial cell loss. [ 11 12 ]…”

“…[ 16 ] However, there have been some instances in which whole eyes or corneoscleral buttons excised from whole eyes are subjected to either SLc- or OUP-automated systems. Given that there was no report on the preparation of endothelial keratoplasty lenticules from fresh whole eyes by using SLc versus CBm, and studies on the comparison between SLc and OUP systems were performed on limited numbers of cases,[ 11 12 ] this study was designed to address these issues.…”

Comparison of four methods of surface roughness assessment of corneal stromal bed after lamellar cutting

“…The most common method is a subjective roughness score applied to scanning electronic microscopy (SEM) [10,[14][15][16][17]. The next most common is the objective measure provided by atomic force microscopy (AFM) [8,9,11,18].…”