Literature DB >> 11188997

Keratoprosthesis: preoperative prognostic categories.

F Yaghouti1, M Nouri, J C Abad, W J Power, M G Doane, C H Dohlman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Recent advances aimed at preventing and treating complications after keratoprosthesis surgery have improved prognosis, but it has been suspected that various preoperative diagnoses may carry substantially different postoperative outcomes. This article attempts to clarify the ranking of prognostic categories for patients undergoing keratoprosthesis surgery.
METHODS: A retrospective review of the outcome in a recent series of 63 patient eyes operated at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary between 1990 and 1997 and followed up for a minimum of 21 months. Anatomic retention of the device and the loss of vision caused by complications were recorded. The patients were divided into four categories according to preoperative cause.
RESULTS: Anatomically, one keratoprosthesis extruded spontaneously. Another 10 were permanently removed because of complications. Of the 63 eyes, 10 never achieved a visual acuity of at least 20/200 vision because of preexisting retinal or optic nerve damage. The remaining 53 had a visual acuity of 20/200 to 20/20 as follows: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (n = 7), after 2 years: 33%, after 5 years: 0%; chemical burn (n = 17), after 2 years: 64%, after 5 years: 25%; ocular cicatricial pemphigoid (n = 20), after 2 years: 72%, after 5 years: 43%; graft failure in noncicatrizing conditions (dystrophies, degenerations, or bacterial or viral infections) when a repeat graft was expected to have a poor prognosis (n = 19), after 2 years: 83%, after 5 years: 68%. The difference in outcome between the Stevens-Johnson syndrome outcome group and the graft failure group or the ocular cicatricial pemphigoid group was statistically significant. In the group of 53 eyes, visual acuity was restored to 20/200 to 20/20 for a cumulative total of 138 years.
CONCLUSION: Outcome of the keratoprosthesis surgery varied markedly with preoperative diagnosis. Most favorable was graft failures in non-cicatrizing conditions, whereas Stevens-Johnson syndrome was the worst. Ocular cicatricial pemphigoid and chemical burns occupied a middle ground. The difference between the groups seemed to correlate with the degree of past preoperative inflammation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11188997     DOI: 10.1097/00003226-200101000-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cornea        ISSN: 0277-3740            Impact factor:   2.651


  42 in total

1.  Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis: the New York Eye and Ear experience.

Authors:  A P Patel; E I Wu; D C Ritterband; J A Seedor
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-12-16       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  [Boston-keratoprosthesis : Preliminary experiences in 13 high-risk eyes from the Department of Ophthalmology of the University of Cologne].

Authors:  F Schaub; D Hos; F Bucher; S Siebelmann; B O Bachmann; C Cursiefen
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Cost effectiveness of the type II Boston keratoprosthesis.

Authors:  J D Ament; T P Stryjewski; S Pujari; S Siddique; G N Papaliodis; J Chodosh; C H Dohlman
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Medium term results in keratoprostheses with biocompatible and biological haptic.

Authors:  K Hille; A Hille; K W Ruprecht
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-11-19       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis for failed keratoplasty.

Authors:  Jonathan L Hager; David L Phillips; Kenneth M Goins; Anna S Kitzmann; Mark A Greiner; Alex W Cohen; Jeffrey D Welder; Michael D Wagoner
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 2.031

6.  Risk factors for the development of retroprosthetic membranes with Boston keratoprosthesis type 1: multicenter study results.

Authors:  Christopher J Rudnisky; Michael W Belin; Amit Todani; Khalid Al-Arfaj; Jared D Ament; Brian J Zerbe; Joseph B Ciolino
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Retention of the Boston keratoprosthesis type 1: multicenter study results.

Authors:  Joseph B Ciolino; Michael W Belin; Amit Todani; Khalid Al-Arfaj; Christopher J Rudnisky
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Tear Matrix Metalloproteinases and Myeloperoxidase Levels in Patients With Boston Keratoprosthesis Type I.

Authors:  Marie-Claude Robert; Samer N Arafat; Sandra Spurr-Michaud; James Chodosh; Claes H Dohlman; Ilene K Gipson
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.651

Review 9.  Amniotic membrane transplantation as a new therapy for the acute ocular manifestations of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis.

Authors:  Elizabeth Shay; Ahmad Kheirkhah; Lingyi Liang; Hossam Sheha; Darren G Gregory; Scheffer C G Tseng
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-08-21       Impact factor: 6.048

10.  High-resolution spectral domain anterior segment optical coherence tomography in type 1 Boston keratoprosthesis.

Authors:  Brett L Shapiro; Dennis E Cortés; Eric K Chin; Jennifer Y Li; John S Werner; Ellen Redenbo; Mark J Mannis
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.651

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.