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

Clotilde Jumelle; Alina Hamri; Gregory Egaud; Cyril Mauclair; Stephanie Reynaud; Virginie Dumas; Sandrine Pereira; Thibaud Garcin; Philippe Gain; Gilles Thuret

doi:10.1364/BOE.8.004974

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

Biomed Opt Express. 2017 Oct 12;8(11):4974-4986. doi: 10.1364/BOE.8.004974. eCollection 2017 Nov 1.

Authors

Clotilde Jumelle¹, Alina Hamri², Gregory Egaud², Cyril Mauclair^{2

3}, Stephanie Reynaud³, Virginie Dumas⁴, Sandrine Pereira⁵, Thibaud Garcin^{1

6}, Philippe Gain^{1

6}, Gilles Thuret^{1

6

7}

Affiliations

¹ Corneal Graft Biology, Engineering and Imaging Laboratory, BiiGC, EA2521, Federative Institute of Research in Sciences and Health Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Jean Monnet University, 10 rue de la Marandière, 42055 Saint-Etienne Cédex 02, France.
² GIE-Manutech-Ultrafast Surface Design, 20 rue Benoit Lauras, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.
³ Hubert Curien Laboratory, UMR-CNRS 5516, Jean Monnet University, 18 rue Benoit Lauras, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.
⁴ Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Saint-Etienne (ENISE), Laboratoire de Tribologie et Dynamique des Systèmes, UMR 5513 CNRS, 58 rue Jean Parot, 42023 Saint-Etienne, France.
⁵ Eye Bank, French Blood Center, 25 boulevard Pasteur, 42023 Saint-Etienne, France.
⁶ Ophthalmology Department, University Hospital, avenue Albert Raimond, 42055 Saint-Etienne Cédex 02, France.
⁷ Institut Universitaire de France, 1 rue Descartes, 75231 Paris, France.

Abstract

Corneal lamellar cutting with a blade or femtosecond laser (FSL) is commonly used during refractive surgery and corneal grafts. Surface roughness of the cutting plane influences postoperative visual acuity but is difficult to assess reliably. For the first time, we compared chromatic confocal microscopy (CCM) with scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy (AFM) and focus-variation microscopy (FVM) to characterize surfaces of variable roughness after FSL cutting. The small area allowed by AFM hinders conclusive roughness analysis, especially with irregular cuts. FVM does not always differentiate between smooth and rough surfaces. Finally, CCM allows analysis of large surfaces and differentiates between surface states.

Keywords: (000.1430) Biology and medicine; (120.0120) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology; (120.6660) Surface measurements, roughness; (170.0170) Medical optics and biotechnology; (170.4470) Ophthalmology; (170.4580) Optical diagnostics for medicine; (180.6900) Three-dimensional microscopy.