Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty in Complicated Vitrectomized Eyes

被引:9
|
作者
Mimouni, Michael [1 ]
Sorkin, Nir [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Slomovic, Jacqueline [1 ]
Kisilevsky, Eli [1 ]
Mednick, Zale [1 ]
Cohen, Eyal [1 ]
Trinh, Tanya [1 ]
Santaella, Gisella [1 ]
Chan, Clara C. [1 ]
Rootman, David S. [1 ]
Slomovic, Allan R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Ophthalmol & Vis Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Tel Aviv Univ, Tel Aviv Med Ctr, Dept Ophthalmol, Tel Aviv, Israel
[3] Tel Aviv Univ, Sackler Fac Med, Tel Aviv, Israel
关键词
DMEK; Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty; DSAEK; Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; vitrectomy; vitrectomized;
D O I
10.1080/02713683.2021.1892150
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose Vitrectomized eyes pose a technical challenge when performing endothelial keratoplasty (EK). The aim of the study was to compare outcomes of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in complex eyes undergoing pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) prior to or during surgery. Methods This retrospective study included consecutive eyes that underwent pars plana infusion-assisted DMEK or pull-through DSAEK which underwent PPV prior to or during the EK at a tertiary center. Included were eyes with at least 1-year follow-up. The main outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and serious adverse events. Results Fifty-two eyes (n = 52) with a mean follow-up time of 24.6 +/- 7.4 months were included. Both groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics although the DMEK group had a significantly larger proportion of Fuchs' patients (p = .009). There was no significant difference in postoperative logMAR BCVA between groups at each visit (p > .05 for all). There was a significantly higher proportion of overall serious adverse events (50.0% versus 15.4%, p = .02), retinal detachments (19.2% versus 0.0%, p = .05) and cystoid macular edema (23.1% versus 0.0%, p = .02) following DMEK. Graft detachment occurred more often following DMEK (53.9% versus 11.5%, p = .001) with no significant difference in rebubbling rates (23.1% versus 11.5%, p = .27). Conclusions A significant and similar improvement in BCVA was achieved following DMEK and DSAEK in complex vitrectomized eyes. Patients should be advised regarding the higher rates of potential serious complications associated with a pars plana infusion DMEK in this situation.
引用
收藏
页码:1283 / 1290
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
    Dunker, Suryan L.
    Dickman, Mor M.
    Wisse, Robert P. L.
    Nobacht, Siamak
    Wijdh, Robert H. J.
    Bartels, Marjolijn C.
    Tang, Mei L.
    van den Biggelaar, Frank J. H. M.
    Kruit, Pieter J.
    Nuijts, Rudy M. M. A.
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 127 (09) : 1152 - 1159
  • [32] Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty compared with ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: a meta-analysis
    Sela, Tal Corina
    Iflah, Moti
    Muhsen, Khitam
    Zahavi, Alon
    BMJ OPEN OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2023, 8 (01):
  • [33] Outcomes of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty, Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty from a single centre study
    S. Heinzelmann
    D. Böhringer
    P. Eberwein
    T. Reinhard
    P. Maier
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2016, 254 : 515 - 522
  • [34] Topographic characteristics after Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty and Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty
    Hayashi, Takahiko
    Yamaguchi, Takefumi
    Yuda, Kentaro
    Kato, Naoko
    Satake, Yoshiyuki
    Shimazaki, Jun
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (11):
  • [35] Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty and Triple Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty in Eyes With Macular Comorbidity
    Steindor, Friedrich A. A.
    Buchau, Till M.
    Borgardts, Klara Charlotte
    Borrelli, Maria
    Guthoff, Rainer
    Geerling, Gerd
    Spaniol, Kristina
    CORNEA, 2023, 42 (08) : 986 - 991
  • [36] Repeat Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty after Complicated Primary Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty
    Baydoun, Lamis
    van Dijk, Korine
    Dapena, Isabel
    Musa, Fayyaz U.
    Liarakos, Vasilis S.
    Ham, Lisanne
    Melles, Gerrit R. J.
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2015, 122 (01) : 8 - 16
  • [37] Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty vs Microthin Descemet Membrane Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty: A Randomised Controlled Trial
    Pujari, Rathin
    Matsou, Artemis
    Sarwar, Hammad
    Rana, Mrinal
    Thomson, Susan
    Myerscough, James
    Nandakumar, Giri
    Rajan, Madhavan
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2020, 61 (07)
  • [38] Prevention and management of complications in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK)
    Cursiefen, C.
    Steven, P.
    Roters, S.
    Heindl, L. M.
    OPHTHALMOLOGE, 2013, 110 (07): : 614 - +
  • [39] Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with failed penetrating keratoplasty
    Covert, Douglas J.
    Koenig, Steven B.
    CORNEA, 2007, 26 (06) : 692 - 696
  • [40] Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) versus non-Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (nDSAEK) for bullous keratopathy
    Yamazaki, Risa
    Nejima, Ryohei
    Ichihashi, Yoshiyuki
    Miyata, Kazunori
    Tsubota, Kazuo
    Shimmura, Shigeto
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 64 (06) : 585 - 590