PURPOSE: To ascertain the feasibility of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) through a permanent Boston Keratoprosthesis type 1 (KPro) without the use of a temporary KPro. METHODS: A retrospective interventional case series. Eyes implanted with Boston KPro type 1 between 2008 and 2011 requiring PPV for vitreoretinal complications were included. Feasibility of PPV through the KPro, its anatomical and functional success were studied. RESULTS: Five out of 70 patients required PPV for vitreoretinal complications post-KPro surgery resulting in an incidence of 7%. PPV was feasible through the Boston KPro with no deleterious effects on the corneal carrier or the KPro itself. Repeat PPV was necessary in some cases. Although anatomical repair of the vitreoretinal complications was achieved in most cases, post PPV visual acuity remained poor in the majority. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that although PPV through the Boston KPro is a viable approach for vitreoretinal disease repair, visual rehabilitation remains poor.
PURPOSE: To ascertain the feasibility of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) through a permanent Boston Keratoprosthesis type 1 (KPro) without the use of a temporary KPro. METHODS: A retrospective interventional case series. Eyes implanted with Boston KPro type 1 between 2008 and 2011 requiring PPV for vitreoretinal complications were included. Feasibility of PPV through the KPro, its anatomical and functional success were studied. RESULTS: Five out of 70 patients required PPV for vitreoretinal complications post-KPro surgery resulting in an incidence of 7%. PPV was feasible through the Boston KPro with no deleterious effects on the corneal carrier or the KPro itself. Repeat PPV was necessary in some cases. Although anatomical repair of the vitreoretinal complications was achieved in most cases, post PPV visual acuity remained poor in the majority. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that although PPV through the Boston KPro is a viable approach for vitreoretinal disease repair, visual rehabilitation remains poor.
Authors: Clara C Chan; Edward J Holland; William I Sawyer; Kristiana D Neff; Michael R Petersen; Christopher D Riemann Journal: Cornea Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 2.651