Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty Under Failed Penetrating Keratoplasty: Visual Rehabilitation and Graft Survival Rate

被引:60
作者
Anshu, Arundhati [1 ,2 ]
Price, Marianne O. [2 ]
Price, Francis W., Jr. [1 ]
机构
[1] Cornea Res Fdn Amer, Indianapolis, IN 46260 USA
[2] Price Vis Grp, Indianapolis, IN USA
关键词
OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; RISK-FACTORS; CORNEAL TRANSPLANTATION; REJECTION; OUTCOMES; FAILURE; EYES; DONOR; COMPLICATIONS; IMPLANT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.04.032
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: To evaluate graft survival, risk factors for failure, complications, and visual rehabilitation in patients who underwent Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) under a failed penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Design: Retrospective interventional case series. Participants: Sixty eyes (60 patients) treated at Price Vision Group, Indianapolis, Indiana. Methods: Graft diameters ranged from 8 to 9 mm and were similar to 1 mm larger than the previous PK. The Descemet's membrane was not stripped in the majority (54, 84%). The graft was inserted using forceps or a Busin funnel glide (Moria, Anthony, France). The probability of graft survival was calculated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Main Outcome Measures: Graft survival, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and complications. Results: The mean recipient age was 68 years (range, 17-95 years). Forty eyes had 1 previous failed PK, 14 eyes had 2 previous failed PKs, and 6 eyes had 3 previous failed PKs. Thirty-one eyes (52%) had preexisting glaucoma, and 16 eyes (27%) had prior glaucoma surgery (trabeculectomy in 4, shunt procedure in 12). Fifty-five grafts were performed for visual rehabilitation, and 5 grafts were performed for pain relief. Median follow-up was 2.3 years (range, 2 months to 6 years). Median preoperative BCVA was 1.23 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (range, 0.2-3, Snellen 20/340), and median postoperative visual improvement was 0.6 logMAR (6 lines), range -0.3 to +2.7. Four eyes had graft detachment (6.6%), 7 eyes (10.5%) had endothelial rejection, and 10 eyes (16.6%) had graft failure (primary failure in 2, secondary failure in 8). The overall secondary graft survival rates were 98%, 90%, 81%, and 74% at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively. Prior glaucoma shunt was the principal risk factor for graft failure. The graft survival rates were 100%, 96%, 96%, and 96% in eyes without a prior shunt versus 93%, 74%, 44%, and 22% with a prior shunt at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively (P = 0.0005; relative risk = 20). Peripheral anterior synechiae (P = 0.14), neovascularization (P = 0.88), endothelial rejection (P = 0.59), and number of prior PKs (P = 0.13) were not independent risk factors for graft failure. Conclusions: Endothelial keratoplasty under a previous failed PK is a useful alternative to a repeat standard PK, particularly in eyes with an acceptable topography and refractive outcome before failure. Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Ophthalmology 2011;118:2155-2160 (C) 2011 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
引用
收藏
页码:2155 / 2160
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty After Failed Descemet Stripping Without Endothelial Keratoplasty [J].
Rao, Rohini ;
Borkar, Durga S. ;
Colby, Kathryn A. ;
Veldman, Peter B. .
CORNEA, 2017, 36 (07) :763-766
[22]   Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty After Failed Penetrating Keratoplasty [J].
Pierne, Kevin ;
Panthier, Christophe ;
Courtin, Romain ;
Mazharian, Adrien ;
Souedan, Vael ;
Gatinel, Damien ;
Saad, Alain .
CORNEA, 2019, 38 (03) :280-284
[23]   Graft Survival Versus Glaucoma Treatment After Penetrating or Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty [J].
Ward, Matthew S. ;
Goins, Kenneth M. ;
Greiner, Mark A. ;
Kitzmann, Anna S. ;
Sutphin, John E. ;
Alward, Wallace L. M. ;
Greenlee, Emily C. ;
Kwon, Young H. ;
Zimmerman, M. Bridget ;
Wagoner, Michael D. .
CORNEA, 2014, 33 (08) :785-789
[24]   Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty Five-Year Graft Survival and Endothelial Cell Loss [J].
Price, Marianne O. ;
Fairchild, Kelly M. ;
Price, David A. ;
Price, Francis W., Jr. .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2011, 118 (04) :725-729
[25]   Cost-Effectiveness of Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Penetrating Keratoplasty [J].
Bose, Saideep ;
Ang, Marcus ;
Mehta, Jodhbir S. ;
Tan, Donald T. ;
Finkelstein, Eric .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 120 (03) :464-470
[26]   Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty for a failed penetrating keratoplasty graft in a pseudophakic patient with a toric intraocular lens: a case report [J].
Kymionis, George D. ;
Kontadakis, George A. .
BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 13
[27]   Repeat keratoplasty in failed Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty [J].
Kaur, Manpreet ;
Titiyal, Jeewan S. ;
Gagrani, Meghal ;
Shaikh, Farin ;
Agarwal, Tushar ;
Sinha, Rajesh ;
Sharma, Namrata .
INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2019, 67 (10) :1586-1592
[28]   Intraocular pressure after penetrating keratoplasty and Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty [J].
Moisseiev, Elad ;
Varssano, David ;
Rosenfeld, Elkanah ;
Rachmiel, Rony .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY-JOURNAL CANADIEN D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2013, 48 (03) :179-185
[29]   Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for penetrating keratoplasty [J].
Al-Essa, Aiad .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACY AND BIOALLIED SCIENCES, 2024, 16 :1748-1753
[30]   Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty for Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy [J].
Hjortdal, Jesper ;
Ehlers, Niels .
ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 2009, 87 (03) :310-314