Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research

Published date: Sep 09 2025

Journal Title: Journal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research

Issue title: ‎Volume 20 - 2025

Pages: 1 - 13

DOI: 10.18502/jovr.v20.15222

Farid Karimiankarimianf@yahoo.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Kiana Hassanpourkiana.hassanpour@gmail.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Farbod Semnanifarsem12@gmail.comNational Center for Health Insurance Research, Tehran

Sepehr Feizisepehrfeizi@yahoo.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Mohammad Ali Javadijavadi_ma@yahoo.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Amir Faramarziamirfaramarzy@yahoo.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Mohammadreza Jafarinasabdr_jafarinasab@yahoo.comOphthalmic Research Center, Research Institute for Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran

Purpose: To compare the graft survival rates and visual outcomes in patients with keratoconus (KCN) undergoing deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) versus penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and identify possible risk factors.

Methods: This retrospective longitudinal study enrolled patients with KCN who underwent corneal transplantation at Labbafinejad Medical Center (Tehran, Iran) between 2006 and 2016. We utilized a one-to-one coarsened exact matching (CEM) approach. Matching considered the recipient’s sex, donor age, and the presence and extent of corneal neovascularization in the recipient.

Results: A total of 213 patients with KCN who underwent PKP (49.8%; n = 106) or DALK (50.2%; n = 107) were enrolled. After CEM was performed, 67 patients in the PKP group were wellmatched with 67 patients in the DALK group. There was no significant difference in terms of baseline characteristics between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the percentage of patients free of graft rejection in a one- and three-year follow-up was 78.7% and 74.5% in the PKP group, and 95.3% and 95.3% in the DALK group, respectively. On univariate analysis, the strongest risk factor predictive of graft rejection was corneal vascularization in both the PKP and DALK groups, followed by recipient age only in the PKP group and dry eye disease only in the DALK group. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, PKP was identified as an independent predictor of graft rejection, but not of graft failure. The DALK and PKP groups were comparable in terms of postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; P = 0.48) and suture complications (P = 0.87).

Conclusion: In patients with KCN, DALK demonstrated comparable outcomes to PKP in terms of BCVA, but showed superiority in graft rejection-free survival. Corneal vascularization was the major recipient risk factor for graft rejection and failure.

Keywords: Coarsened Exact Matching, Deep Anterior Lamellar Keratoplasty, Graft Failure, Graft Rejection, Keratoconus, Penetrating Keratoplasty

1. Tuft SJ, Gregory WM, Davison CR. Bilateral penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus. Ophthalmology 1995;102:462–468.

2. Sugar A, Sugar J. Techniques in penetrating keratoplasty: A quarter century of development. Cornea 2000;19:603– 610.

3. Zare M, Javadi MA, Einollahi B, Karimian F, Rafie AR, Feizi S, et al. Changing indications and surgical techniques for corneal transplantation between 2004 and 2009 at a tertiary referral center. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2012;19:323–329.

4. Panda A, Bageshwar LM, Ray M, Singh JP, Kumar A. Deep lamellar keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty for corneal lesions. Cornea 1999;18:172–175.

5. Banerjee S, Dick AD. Recent developments in the pharmacological treatment and prevention of corneal graft rejection. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2003;12:29–37.

6. Baradaran-Rafii A, Karimian F, Javadi MA, Jafarinasab MR, Nowroozpour K, Hosseini M, et al. Corneal graft rejection: Incidence and risk factors. Iran J Ophthal Res 2007;2:7–14.

7. Allan BD, Terry MA, Price FW Jr, Price MO, Griffin NB, Claesson M. Corneal transplant rejection rate and severity after endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 2007;26:1039– 1042.

8. Guilbert E, Bullet J, Sandali O, Basli E, Laroche L, Borderie VM. Long-term rejection incidence and reversibility after penetrating and lamellar keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2013;155:560–569.e2.

9. Niederkorn JY. Immunology and immunomodulation of corneal transplantation. Int Rev Immunol 2002;21:173–196.

10. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW Jr. Risk of corneal transplant rejection significantly reduced with Descemet’s membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Ophthalmology 2012;119:536– 540.

11. Jonas JB, Rank RM, Budde WM. Immunologic graft reactions after allogenic penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:437–443.

12. Shoja M, Besharati M. Indications and outcome of penetrating keratoplasy in Yazd. J Inflamm Dis 2024;10:e155220.

13. Trimarchi F, Poppi E, Klersy C, Piacentini C. Deep lamellar keratoplasty. Ophthalmologica 2001;215:389–393.

14. Karimian F, Feizi S. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty: Indications, surgical techniques and complications. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2010;17:28–37.

15. Reinhart WJ, Musch DC, Jacobs DS, Lee WB, Kaufman SC, Shtein RM. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty as an alternative to penetrating keratoplasty: A report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2011;118:209–218.

16. Borderie VM, Georgeon C, Sandali O, Bouheraoua N. Long-term outcomes of deep anterior lamellar versus penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol 2023;108:10–16.

17. Spadea L, De Rosa V. Current techniques of lamellar keratoplasty for keratoconus. Saudi Med J 2016;37:127– 136.

18. Javadi MA, Feizi S, Yazdani S, Mirbabaee F. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus: A clinical trial. Cornea 2010;29:365–371.

19. Cohen AW, Goins KM, Sutphin JE, Wandling GR, Wagoner MD. Penetrating keratoplasty versus deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty for the treatment of keratoconus. Int Ophthalmol 2010;30:675–681.

20. Inoue K, Amano S, Oshika T, Tsuru T. Risk factors for corneal graft failure and rejection in penetrating keratoplasty. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2001;79:251–255.

21. Epstein AJ, de Castro TN, Laibson PR, Cohen EJ, Rapuano CJ. Risk factors for the first episode of corneal graft rejection in keratoconus. Cornea 2006;25:1005–1011.

22. Borderie VM, Guilbert E, Touzeau O, Laroche L. Graft rejection and graft failure after anterior lamellar versus penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2011;151:1024– 1029.e1.

23. Blackwell M, Iacus S, King G, Porro G. cem: Coarsened Exact Matching in Stata. 2010. http://GKing.Harvard.Edu

24. Ardjomand N, McAlister JC, Rogers NJ, Tan PH, George AJ, Larkin DF. Modulation of costimulation by CD28 and CD154 alters the kinetics and cellular characteristics of corneal allograft rejection. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:3899–3905.

25. Foroutan A, Fariba B, Pejman B, Mahmoud J, Khalil GF, Arash EA, et al. Perilimbal bevacizumab injection for interface neovascularization after deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty. Cornea 2010;29:1268–1272.

26. Goh BK, Syn N, Koh YX, Teo JY, Cheow PC, Jeyaraj PR, et al. Comparison between short and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open primary liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma: A 1:1 matched analysis. J Surg Oncol 2021;124:560–571.

27. Stuart EA. Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Stat Sci 2010;25:1–21.

28. Barraquer RI, Pareja-Aricò L, Gómez-Benlloch A, Michael R. Risk factors for graft failure after penetrating keratoplasty. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e15274.

29. Bachmann B, Taylor RS, Cursiefen C. Corneal neovascularization as a risk factor for graft failure and rejection after keratoplasty: An evidence-based meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2010;117:1300–1305.e7.

30. Feizi S, Javadi MA, Karimian F, Bayat K, Bineshfar N, Esfandiari H. Penetrating keratoplasty versus deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty for advanced stage of keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol 2023;248:107–115.

31. El Annan J, Goyal S, Zhang Q, Freeman GJ, Sharpe AH, Dana R. Regulation of T-cell chemotaxis by programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in dry eye-associated corneal inflammation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010;51:3418– 3423.

32. Liu H, Chen Y, Wang P, Li B, Wang W, Su Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty vs. penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus: A metaanalysis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0113332.

33. Cheng YY, Visser N, Schouten JS, Wijdh RJ, Pels E, van Cleynenbreugel H, et al. Endothelial cell loss and visual outcome of deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty: A randomized multicenter clinical trial. Ophthalmology 2011;118:302–309.

34. Söğütlü Sari E, Kubaloğlu A, Ünal M, Piñero Llorens D, Koytak A, Ofluoǧlu AN, et al. Penetrating keratoplasty versus deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty: Comparison of optical and visual quality outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol 2012;96:1063–1067.

35. Fontana L, Parente G, Sincich A, Tassinari G. Influence of graft-host interface on the quality of vision after deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty in patients with keratoconus. Cornea 2011;30:497–502.

36. Funnell CL, Ball J, Noble BA. Comparative cohort study of the outcomes of deep lamellar keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus. Eye (Lond) 2006;20:527–532.

37. Watson SL, Ramsay A, Dart JK, Bunce C, Craig E. Comparison of deep lamellar keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty in patients with keratoconus. Ophthalmology 2004;111:1676–1682.