PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate risk factors for and results of treatments in patients with traumatic wound dehiscence and lens extrusion after penetrating keratoplasty. METHODS: In this retrospective case series, 7 eyes (4 right eyes and 3 left eyes) of 7 patients who had traumatic wound dehiscence and lens extrusion were studied at Rassoul Akram Hospital. Six patients were male and one patient was female. After emergency treatment for the trauma, the wound was checked under general anesthesia, and anterior vitrectomy was performed. The iris was repositioned as needed and the dehiscence site was sutured in all patients using 10-0 nylon thread. Follow up was similar to that after keratoplasty. All recorded data were statistically analyzed using SPSS software (version 15; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). RESULTS: Mean age at trauma was 21 years (range, 10-30 years), and the mean interval between keratoplasty and trauma was 15.6 months (range, 2.5-26.5 months). Mean best-corrected visual acuity of patients before blunt trauma and after final treatment was 20/80 and 20/160, respectively. In one case, visual acuity decreased to light perception after final treatment. The dehiscence site was superior to the graft in 4 patients. Hitting by a hand was the cause of most cases of blunt trauma. No cases of endophthalmitis were seen. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo penetrating keratoplasty are susceptible to graft wound dehiscence resulting from trauma, especially during the first year after keratoplasty. This type of dehiscence is more prevalent in young people, who engage in more social activities and are more exposed to trauma that may lead to blindness. Patient education about the effects of trauma, use of protective eye shields by patients, and performance of lamellar keratoplasty instead of penetrating keratoplasty can decrease trauma and its effects in these patients.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate risk factors for and results of treatments in patients with traumatic wound dehiscence and lens extrusion after penetrating keratoplasty. METHODS: In this retrospective case series, 7 eyes (4 right eyes and 3 left eyes) of 7 patients who had traumatic wound dehiscence and lens extrusion were studied at Rassoul Akram Hospital. Six patients were male and one patient was female. After emergency treatment for the trauma, the wound was checked under general anesthesia, and anterior vitrectomy was performed. The iris was repositioned as needed and the dehiscence site was sutured in all patients using 10-0 nylon thread. Follow up was similar to that after keratoplasty. All recorded data were statistically analyzed using SPSS software (version 15; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). RESULTS: Mean age at trauma was 21 years (range, 10-30 years), and the mean interval between keratoplasty and trauma was 15.6 months (range, 2.5-26.5 months). Mean best-corrected visual acuity of patients before blunt trauma and after final treatment was 20/80 and 20/160, respectively. In one case, visual acuity decreased to light perception after final treatment. The dehiscence site was superior to the graft in 4 patients. Hitting by a hand was the cause of most cases of blunt trauma. No cases of endophthalmitis were seen. CONCLUSION:Patients who undergo penetrating keratoplasty are susceptible to graft wound dehiscence resulting from trauma, especially during the first year after keratoplasty. This type of dehiscence is more prevalent in young people, who engage in more social activities and are more exposed to trauma that may lead to blindness. Patient education about the effects of trauma, use of protective eye shields by patients, and performance of lamellar keratoplasty instead of penetrating keratoplasty can decrease trauma and its effects in these patients.