You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 104 No. 5, May 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  CLINICAL SCIENCES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (35)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Combined Morphologic Effects of Cryolathing and Lyophilization on Epikeratoplasty Lenticules

Perry S. Binder, MD; Edward Y. Zavala; Stephen D. Baumgartner; Shankar K. Nayak, PhD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1986;104(5):671-679.


Abstract

• A correlative microscopic analysis of factory-prepared epikeratoplasty lenticules, corneas stored in McCarey-Kaufman medium for two to four days, and fresh human corneas disclosed ultrastructural abnormalities in Bowman's membrane and in the corneal stroma of the lyophilized lenticules that were not present in the control corneas. These features included mottling of Bowman's membrane, with large interfibrillar spaces; a roughness to its surface; and wide interlamellar lacunae within the corneal stroma, with significant changes in interfibrillar collagen distance and fibril diameter. The morphologic features of a clinical specimen excised three months following myopic epikeratoplasty were similar to those found with the factory-prepared lenticules. Our patient's corneal curvature steepened almost 3 diopters following lenticule removal. Our results suggest that additional studies of lyophilized epikeratoplasty lenticules should be performed.



Author Affiliations

From The Ophthalmology Research Laboratory, Sharp Cabrillo Hospital, San Diego.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Dec 20, 1985.

Reprint requests to 9834 Genesee Ave, Suite 200, La Jolla, CA 92037 (Dr Binder).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Subepithelial Fibrosis After Myopic Epikeratoplasty: Report of a Case
Bechara et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 1992;110:228-232.
ABSTRACT  

The Use of Contact Lenses After Keratoconic Epikeratoplasty
Lembach et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 1989;107:364-368.
ABSTRACT  

Penetrating Keratoplasty After Epikeratophakia for Keratoconus
Frantz et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 1988;106:1224-1227.
ABSTRACT  

Scarring of a Recipient Cornea Following Epikeratoplasty
Price and Binder
Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1556-1560.
ABSTRACT  

Laboratory Evaluation of Freeze vs Nonfreeze Lamellar Refractive Keratoplasty
Zavala and Krumeich
Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1125-1128.
ABSTRACT  

Why Do Some Epikeratoplasties Fail?
Binder and Zavala
Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:63-69.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1986 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.