| Literature DB >> 23977215 |
Chang-Min Liang1, Yi-Hao Chen, Da-Wen Lu, Jiann-Torng Chen, Ming-Cheng Tai.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the outcomes of Descemet-stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) with the use of continuous air pumping technique in Asian eyes with previous Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23977215 PMCID: PMC3745467 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072089
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the modified DSAEK procedure.
A, B) Donor tissue insertion. C, D) Continuous air pumping. E, F) Drainage of interface fluid from venting incision.
Figure 2Modified DSAEK procedure.
A) Preoperative image. B-D) Tube was cut intraoperatively. E) Descemet’s stripping with 30 mm Hg pressure. F) Donor tissue insertion. G) Continuous air pumping (30 mm Hg for 10 min). H) Drainage of interface fluid from venting incision. I) Residual air bubble left at the end of the surgery. J) Image at 1 week postoperatively.
Characteristics of patients who received modified DSAEK and those who received conventional DSAEK.
| Modified DSAEK ( | Conventional DSAEK ( |
| |
|
| 66.0 (57.0, 68.0) | 65.5 (57.0, 69.0) | 0.930 |
|
| |||
| Female | 6 (46.2) | 4 (66.7) | 0.629 |
| Male | 7 (53.9) | 2 (33.3) | |
|
| |||
| OD | 8 (61.5) | 3 (50.0) | 1.000 |
| OS | 5 (38.5) | 3 (50.0) | |
|
| |||
| Open angle | 4 (30.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0.292 |
| Uveitic | 4 (30.8) | 1 (16.7) | |
| Closed angle | 5 (38.5) | 5 (83.3) | |
|
| |||
| 0 | 4 (30.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0.119 |
| 1 | 7 (53.9) | 3 (50.0) | |
| 2 | 1 (7.7) | 3 (50.0) | |
| 3 | 1 (7.7) | 0 (0.0) | |
|
| |||
| Anterior Chamber | 10 (76.9) | 5 (83.3) | 1.000 |
| Posterior chamber | 3 (23.1) | 1 (16.7) | |
|
| 15.0 (10.0, 15.0) | 18.5 (4.0, 19.0) | 0.427 |
Continuous data are presented as median (IQR),
categorical data are presented as number (%).
Mann-Whitney U test;
Fisher’s exact test.
DSAEK, Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.
Figure 3Estimated graft survival determined by Kaplan-Meier method.
Postoperative clinical features compared between patients who received modified DSAEK and those who received conventional DSAEK.
| Secondary outcomes | Modified DSAEK ( | Conventional DSAEK ( |
|
| Rate of graft detachment | 0/13 (0%) | 2/6 (33.3%) | 0.088 |
| Preoperative IOP (mm Hg) | 14.0 (13.0, 18.0) | 17.0 (15.0, 18.0) | 0.627 |
| Postoperative IOP (mm Hg) | 12.0 (11.0, 15.0) | 16.0 (15.0, 18.0) | 0.047 |
| Difference of IOP (mm Hg) | −2.0 (−3.0, −1.0) | 0.0 (−2.0, 2.0) | 0.289 |
| Endothelial cell count | 2148.0 (1964.0, 2218.0) | 1529.0 (713.0, 2014.0) | 0.072 |
| Surgical time for air tamponade | 10.0 (10.0, 10.0) | 24.5 (22.0, 27.0) | <0.001 |
Categorical data are presented by counts and percentage.
Continuous data are presented as median (IQR).
Differences are calculated as postoperative IOP minus preoperative IOP.
Mann-Whitney U test.
DSAEK, Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; IOP, intraocular pressure.
Figure 4Postoperative follow-up AS-OCT images.
A) Ahmed tube position close to the endothelium causing endothelial failure. B) Peripheral anterior synechiae (PAS). C) Wide open angle after synechiolysis and air tamponade. D) Position of Ahmed tube. E) Position of graft and evaluation of angle.