Literature DB >> 17592314

Visual acuity, refractive error, and endothelial cell density six months after Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).

Steven B Koenig1, Douglas J Covert, William J Dupps, David M Meisler.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual acuity, refractive outcomes, and endothelial cell density 6 months after Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).
METHODS: We performed an institutional review board-approved prospective study of a surgical case series of 34 patients at 2 institutions undergoing DSAEK for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, or aphakic bullous keratopathy with or without simultaneous phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation. Clinical outcomes, including best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), spherical equivalent refraction, and refractive astigmatism and topographic or keratometric astigmatism, were assessed at the 6-month postoperative examination and compared with preoperative values with paired Student t tests. The change in endothelial cell density from the eye bank examination to 6 months after transplantation was similarly evaluated.
RESULTS: BSCVA averaged 20/99 preoperatively and 20/42 postoperatively (P < 0.0001). After DSAEK, 30 (88.2%) of 34 patients showed improved BSCVA, and 21 (61.8%) of the 34 patients achieved a BSCVA of 20/40 or better. For patients not undergoing simultaneous phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation, a hyperopic shift in refraction of 1.19 +/- 1.32 D was noted. Refractive astigmatism, topographic astigmatism, and keratometry showed no statistically significant change. Endothelial cell density of donor corneas averaged 2826 +/- 370 cells/mm, whereas the mean postoperative density was 1396 +/- 440 cells/mm. This finding corresponded to an average loss of 1426 cells/mm (50% loss; P = 0.0001). The first half of cases experienced an average cell loss of 1674 cells/mm (59% loss) compared with 1181 (41% loss) in the second half of cases (P = 0.005). Three (9%) of 34 grafts experienced iatrogenic graft failure and required reoperation with new donor tissue. Also, 9 (27%) of 34 grafts experienced dislocation in the early postoperative period and required repositioning.
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study of DSAEK for bullous keratopathy and Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy, improvement of visual acuity was achieved with only a mild tendency toward hyperopic shift and without significant induced astigmatism. Endothelial cell loss was significant, however, and may be related to surgical experience.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17592314     DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3180544902

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


  52 in total

1.  Intraocular pressure elevation after Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty.

Authors:  Naoki Ozeki; Kenya Yuki; Daisuke Shiba; Shigeto Shimmura; Dogru Murat; Kazuo Tsubota
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  Comparison of outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty versus Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty for penetrating keratoplasty graft failure due to corneal edema.

Authors:  Anna S Kitzmann; George R Wandling; John E Sutphin; Kenneth M Goins; Michael D Wagoner
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01-22       Impact factor: 2.031

3.  Endothelial damage of a donor cornea depending on the donor insertion method during Descemet-stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in porcine eyes.

Authors:  Hosik Hwang; Mansoo Kim
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 2.447

4.  Incidence of cystoid macular edema after Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Authors:  Eduard Pedemonte-Sarrias; Toni Salvador Playà; Irene Sassot Cladera; Oscar Gris; Joan Ribas Martínez; José García-Arumí; Núria Giménez
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Abnormal corneal endothelial maturation in collagen XII and XIV null mice.

Authors:  Chinda Hemmavanh; Manuel Koch; David E Birk; Edgar M Espana
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Comparison of corneal haze and visual outcome in primary DSAEK versus DSAEK following failed DMEK.

Authors:  Francisco Arnalich-Montiel; José L Hernández-Verdejo; Noelia Oblanca; Francisco J Muñoz-Negrete; Maria P De Miguel
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Endothelial Keratoplasty: From DLEK to DMEK.

Authors:  Mark M Fernandez; Natalie A Afshari
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-01

8.  A comparison of posterior lamellar keratoplasty modalities: DLEK vs. DSEK.

Authors:  Chan-Hui Yi; Dong-Hoon Lee; Eui-Sang Chung; Tae-Young Chung
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-08-03

9.  Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Shreya S Prabhu; Rola Kaakeh; Alan Sugar; Dean G Smith; Roni M Shtein
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 5.258

10.  Descemet stripping and endothelial keratoplasty in endothelial dysfunctions: three-month results in 75 eyes.

Authors:  Samar K Basak
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.848

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.