Yoav Nahum1, Cataldo Russo, Silvana Madi, Massimo Busin. 1. *Department of Ophthalmology, "Villa Igea" Hospital, Forli, Italy; †Istituto Internazionale per la Ricerca e Formazione in Oftalmologia (IRFO), Forli, Italy; ‡Department of Ophthalmology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel; §Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel; and ¶University of Alexandria, Alexandria, Egypt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual outcomes and graft survival rate after therapeutic keratoplasty performed for interface infection after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). METHODS: This is a retrospective, interventional case series. The study population comprised 7 patients who developed unilateral post-DSAEK interface infection unresponsive to conservative treatment, with or without graft exchange, and were treated with penetrating keratoplasty (PK), 9 to 9.5 mm in diameter, with en bloc excision of the recipient cornea and DSAEK graft. The main outcome measures included best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, refractive error, histological examination, reinfection, and rejection and graft survival rates. RESULTS: Interface infection was diagnosed in 10 (0.92%) of 1088 eyes that underwent DSAEK at our institution between 2005 and 2013. Seven of 10 eyes (0.64% of the total) were unresponsive to conservative treatment and underwent therapeutic keratoplasty. Candida and Staphylococcus species were identified in 3 cases each, and Nocardia species was identified in 1 case. With a mean post-PK follow-up of 25.4 months (range 4-60 months), no recurrence of infection was seen in any eye, and 5 of 7 PK grafts remained clear. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was 20/20 in 2 eyes, better than 20/50 in 4 eyes, and 20/100 or worse in 3 eyes, in 2 of which the graft had failed within 1 year of performing the PK. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic keratoplasty is instrumental in eliminating interface infection after DSAEK, possibly leading to excellent visual outcomes with a relatively high graft survival rate.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual outcomes and graft survival rate after therapeutic keratoplasty performed for interface infection after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). METHODS: This is a retrospective, interventional case series. The study population comprised 7 patients who developed unilateral post-DSAEK interface infection unresponsive to conservative treatment, with or without graft exchange, and were treated with penetrating keratoplasty (PK), 9 to 9.5 mm in diameter, with en bloc excision of the recipient cornea and DSAEK graft. The main outcome measures included best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, refractive error, histological examination, reinfection, and rejection and graft survival rates. RESULTS: Interface infection was diagnosed in 10 (0.92%) of 1088 eyes that underwent DSAEK at our institution between 2005 and 2013. Seven of 10 eyes (0.64% of the total) were unresponsive to conservative treatment and underwent therapeutic keratoplasty. Candida and Staphylococcus species were identified in 3 cases each, and Nocardia species was identified in 1 case. With a mean post-PK follow-up of 25.4 months (range 4-60 months), no recurrence of infection was seen in any eye, and 5 of 7 PK grafts remained clear. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was 20/20 in 2 eyes, better than 20/50 in 4 eyes, and 20/100 or worse in 3 eyes, in 2 of which the graft had failed within 1 year of performing the PK. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic keratoplasty is instrumental in eliminating interface infection after DSAEK, possibly leading to excellent visual outcomes with a relatively high graft survival rate.
Authors: Sotiria Palioura; Kavitha Sivaraman; Madhura Joag; Adam Sise; Juan F Batlle; Darlene Miller; Edgar M Espana; Guillermo Amescua; Sonia H Yoo; Anat Galor; Carol L Karp Journal: Cornea Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 2.651
Authors: Luigi Fontana; Alice Caristia; Alessandra Cornacchia; Giuseppe Russello; Antonio Moramarco Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: Shahzad I Mian; Anthony J Aldave; Elmer Y Tu; Brandon D Ayres; Bennie H Jeng; Marian S Macsai; Michael L Nordlund; Jeffrey G Penta; Sudeep Pramanik; Loretta B Szczotka-Flynn; Allison R Ayala; Wendi Liang; Maureen G Maguire; Jonathan H Lass Journal: Cornea Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.651
Authors: Youssef W Naguib; Sanjib Saha; Jessica M Skeie; Timothy Acri; Kareem Ebeid; Somaya Abdel-Rahman; Sandeep Kesh; Gregory A Schmidt; Darryl Y Nishimura; Jeffrey A Banas; Min Zhu; Mark A Greiner; Aliasger K Salem Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2021-05-01 Impact factor: 15.304
Authors: Luigi Fontana; Antonio Moramarco; Erika Mandarà; Giuseppe Russello; Alfonso Iovieno Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-10-24 Impact factor: 4.638