| Literature DB >> 35244627 |
Fei Xia1,2,3,4, Jing Zhao1,2,3,4, Dan Fu1,2,3,4, Bing Qin1,2,3,4, Zhi Chen1,2,3,4, Yu Zhao1,2,3,4, Yang Shen1,2,3,4, Jiayun Hou5, Xingtao Zhou1,2,3,4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the optimal method of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE)-derived lenticules, subjected to long-term preservation using glycerol, under a range of temperatures, and using an array of dehydration agents.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35244627 PMCID: PMC8895973 DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000002846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cornea ISSN: 0277-3740 Impact factor: 2.651
FIGURE 1.The experimental flowchart.
Baseline Characteristics of Donor Stromal Lenticules by Group
| Group | Conditions | Donor Age (yrs) | SE (Diopters) | Optical Zone (mm) | Max Thickness (μm) |
| 1 | RT W SG | 25.33 ± 5.71 | −5.33 ± 1.66 | 6.70 ± 0.28 | 118.75 ± 13.61 |
| 2 | RT WT SG | 26.00 ± 5.21 | −6.27 ± 1.45 | 6.68 ± 0.24 | 117.88 ± 11.00 |
| 3 | 4D W SG | 26.22 ± 4.0 | −6.08 ± 0.96 | 6.73 ± 0.11 | 119 ± 12.52 |
| 4 | 4D WT SG | 24.62 ± 5.40 | −6.27 ± 0.87 | 6.78 ± 0.05 | 121.11 ± 12.45 |
| 5 | M20 W SG | 24.44 ± 4.56 | −6.26 ± 1.18 | 6.70 ± 0.18 | 120.56 ± 15.31 |
| 6 | M20 WT SG | 25.71 ± 4.89 | −6.00 ± 0.80 | 6.79 ± 0.06 | 122.14 ± 11.98 |
| 7 | M80 W SG | 25.00 ± 4.35 | −6.74 ± 1.42 | 6.67 ± 0.18 | 124.89 ± 14.05 |
| 8 | M80 WT SG | 23.83 ± 3.06 | −6.39 ± 1.03 | 6.68 ± 0.19 | 122.81 ± 10.06 |
| 9 | Fresh lenticules | 26.5 ± 4.12 | −6.17 ± 0.65 | 6.71 ± 0.10 | 121.75 ± 10.14 |
|
| 0.924 | 0.722 | 0.372 | 0.45 |
D, degrees; SE, spherical equivalent; M, minus; SG, silica gel; W, with; WT, without.
Thickness Measurements Before and After Preservation Among Groups
| Group | Conditions | Thickness at Baseline (μm) | Thickness after Preservation for 3 mo (μm) |
|
| 1 | RT W SG | 122.17 ± 4.58 | 147.67 ± 3.88 | <0.001 |
| 2 | RT WT SG | 117.17 ± 3.00 | 144.17 ± 3.49 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 4D W SG | 112.50 ± 2.26 | 119.84 ± 1.83 | 0.001 |
| 4 | 4D WT SG | 117.50 ± 2.88 | 128.17 ± 7.78 | 0.012 |
| 5 | M20 W SG | 120.21 ± 3.71 | 124.66 ± 3.33 | <0.001 |
| 6 | M20 WT SG | 120.83 ± 3.19 | 126.81 ± 3.87 | 0.002 |
| 7 | M80 W SG | 118.50 ± 5.17 | 123.33 ± 5.96 | 0.094 |
| 8 | M80 WT SG | 116.78 ± 4.89 | 122.00 ± 8.08 | 0.147 |
| 9 | Fresh lenticules | 113.42 ± 4.17 |
D, degrees; M, minus; SG, silica gel; W, with; WT, without.
Mean Spectral Transmittance in Each Group
| Group | Conditions | Mean Spectral Transmittance (%) |
| 1 | RT W SG | 67.98 ± 10.58 |
| 2 | RT WT SG | 65.53 ± 10.98 |
| 3 | 4D W SG | 76.35 ± 6.89 |
| 4 | 4D WT SG | 77.40 ± 6.60 |
| 5 | M20 W SG | 77.33 ± 4.76 |
| 6 | M20 WT SG | 78.17 ± 4.75 |
| 7 | M80 W SG | 81.26 ± 4.39 |
| 8 | M80 WT SG | 81.55 ± 4.59 |
| 9 | Fresh lenticules | 82.49 ± 3.90 |
P < 0.001, versus group 9 fresh lenticules.
P < 0.01, versus group 9 fresh lenticules.
D, degrees; M, minus; SG, silica gel; W, with; WT, without.
FIGURE 2.Representative images of H&E staining showed the histological changes of lenticules among different groups. The anterior surface of the lenticule (arrows) is relatively regular, and there are cavitation bubbles (asterisks) between layers (bar, 50 μm).
FIGURE 3.Transmission electron micrograph of transverse section of collagen fibrils in each group (bar, 0.2 μm).
FIGURE 4.Transmission electron micrograph of longitudinal section of collagen fibrils in each group (bar, 0.2 μm).
FIGURE 5.Transmission electron micrograph of keratocytes in each group (bar, 2 μm).