Literature DB >> 21045670

Comparison of bifold forceps and cartridge injector suture pull-through insertion techniques for Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Lucas J A Wendel1, Kenneth M Goins, John E Sutphin, Michael D Wagoner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of bifold forceps and cartridge injector suture pull-through insertion techniques for Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).
METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of the medical records of all patients treated with DSAEK at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics from January 1, 2005 to July 1, 2007. The main outcome measures (endothelial cell loss, graft survival, and visual acuity) were evaluated postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months.
RESULTS: Of 179 DSAEK procedures carried out during the study period, the bifold forceps insertion technique was used in 143 cases and the cartridge injector suture pull-through insertion technique was performed in 36 cases. The mean follow-up was 17.4 ± 9.5 months and 19.1 ± 11.0 months for the 2 groups, respectively. No significant differences were detected in postoperative complications, endothelial cell loss, visual acuity, or graft survival between the 2 groups. At 12 months postoperatively, the forceps and pull-through insertion groups had a mean endothelial cell loss of 42.5% ± 23.0% and 51.4% ± 26.1%, respectively. After 1 postoperative year, the mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution vision values were 0.171 ± 0.015 (Snellen equivalent = 20/30) in the forceps group and 0.253 ± 0.039 (Snellen equivalent = 20/36) in the pull-through group. At the most recent examination, 136 (95.1%) forceps insertion and 35 (97.2%) pull-through insertion grafts were clear.
CONCLUSIONS: Bifold forceps and suture pull-through insertion techniques are associated with similar surgical outcomes after DSAEK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21045670     DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181eadb84

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


  5 in total

1.  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

2.  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

Review 3.  Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Authors:  Namrata Sharma; Prafulla K Maharana; Shipra Singhi; Neelima Aron; Mukesh Patil
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.848

Review 4.  Evolution of therapies for the corneal endothelium: past, present and future approaches.

Authors:  Hon Shing Ong; Marcus Ang; Jodhbir Mehta
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 4.638

5.  Suture pull-through insertion of graft donor in Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: Results of 4-year follow-up.

Authors:  Vincenzo Sarnicola; Chiara Millacci; Enrica Sarnicola; Caterina Sarnicola; Francesco Sabatino; Andrew Ruggiero
Journal:  Taiwan J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-08-28
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.