Skip to main content
. 2026 May 20;13:1845722. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1845722

Figure 3.

Panel A shows an eye with a cloudy cornea and visible lesion. Panel B depicts a clearer cornea with a small central opacity. Panel C displays a severely opaque cornea. Panel D presents a partially clear cornea post-surgery with sutures visible. Panel E shows an edematous cornea with a central white lesion. Panel F illustrates a cloudy cornea with radial sutures in place. Panel G is a fluorescent-stained image highlighting the corneal sutures and healing patterns under blue light. Panel H shows a healing cornea with visible sutures and partial opacity.

Management of typical complications in the two groups. (A–D) Case of re-perforation in the AMP group: (A) preoperative view showing a perforation area inferior to the pupil; AMP was performed after anti-inflammatory treatment. (B) At the time of planned suture removal, mild infection around the AM plug with a tendency toward dissolution was observed, and the perforation area was re-exposed. (C) The patient was readmitted for anti-inflammatory treatment; after inflammation subsided, another session of AMP was performed. (D) Recovery after the second surgery was uneventful; after suture removal, the AM gradually dissolved and was replaced by autologous stromal tissue. (E–H) Case of rejection in the APCS-PP-DALK group: (E) Preoperative examination revealed descemetocele; APCS-PP-DALK was performed. (F) Two days postoperatively, anterior chamber inflammatory hypopyon and graft edema occurred; anti-inflammatory and anti-rejection treatment was administered. (G) The graft epithelium healed well post-treatment. (H) After treatment, the hypopyon resolved and graft edema decreased, with good epithelial healing; however, graft transparency was significantly reduced.