A Panda1, N Sharma, S K Angra, R Singh. 1. Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. anitap@medinst.ernet.in
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of newer surgical technique of sclerokeratoplasty in cases of refractory corneal ulcers of the cornea and to compare it with therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty. METHODS: A randomized, prospective clinical trial in 20 eyes with refractory corneal ulcers was undertaken. Ten eyes each underwent sclerokeratoplasty (group I) or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (group II). Infections were considered cured if there was no evidence of corneal infiltration for 1 month following keratoplasty. Postoperative complications, visual acuity (VA), keratometry and graft status were evaluated with both the procedures after a minimum follow up of 1 year. RESULTS:Postoperative complications included epithelial defects, shallow anterior chamber, uveitis and secondary glaucoma, which were present following both procedures, with no significant difference in the frequency of complications between the two techniques (P < 005), Graft clarity and VA with both procedures were comparable. Significantly reduced astigmatism of < 1 D was seen in six eyes in group II in comparison with group I, where astigmatism of > 1.5 D was present in six eyes. Two eyes in group II developed re-infection, of which one was re-operated on, and the other developed endophthalmitis. CONCLUSIONS:Sclerokeratoplasty is a useful alternative to therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty in cases of refractory corneal ulcers with optimum clinical and useful visual outcome.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of newer surgical technique of sclerokeratoplasty in cases of refractory corneal ulcers of the cornea and to compare it with therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty. METHODS: A randomized, prospective clinical trial in 20 eyes with refractory corneal ulcers was undertaken. Ten eyes each underwent sclerokeratoplasty (group I) or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (group II). Infections were considered cured if there was no evidence of corneal infiltration for 1 month following keratoplasty. Postoperative complications, visual acuity (VA), keratometry and graft status were evaluated with both the procedures after a minimum follow up of 1 year. RESULTS: Postoperative complications included epithelial defects, shallow anterior chamber, uveitis and secondary glaucoma, which were present following both procedures, with no significant difference in the frequency of complications between the two techniques (P < 005), Graft clarity and VA with both procedures were comparable. Significantly reduced astigmatism of < 1 D was seen in six eyes in group II in comparison with group I, where astigmatism of > 1.5 D was present in six eyes. Two eyes in group II developed re-infection, of which one was re-operated on, and the other developed endophthalmitis. CONCLUSIONS: Sclerokeratoplasty is a useful alternative to therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty in cases of refractory corneal ulcers with optimum clinical and useful visual outcome.