Sumayya Ahmad1, Esen K Akpek1, Peter L Gehlbach1, Karen Dunlap1, Pradeep Y Ramulu2. 1. The Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. The Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: pramulu@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify predictors of visual outcomes following Boston type 1 Keratoprosthesis (KPro) implantation. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: Data regarding preoperative clinical and demographic characteristics and postoperative course were collected. PATIENTS: Fifty-nine eyes of 59 adult patients who underwent KPro implantation between January 2006 and March 2012 at a single tertiary care center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative factors associated with all-cause and glaucoma-related loss of visual acuity from the best postoperative visual acuity noted. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 59 eyes (88%) achieved improved vision post implantation, with 7 eyes failing to gain vision as a result of pre-existing glaucoma (n = 4) or retino-choroidal disease (n = 3). Twenty-one eyes (21/52, 40%) maintained their best-ever visual acuity at last visit (mean follow-up period was 37.8 months). The likelihood of maintaining best-ever vision was 71% at 1 year, 59% at 2 years, and 48% at 3 years. Primary KPro implantation was associated with a higher likelihood of losing best-ever vision as compared to KPro implantation as a repeat corneal procedure (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.06; P = 006). The main reasons for postimplantation vision loss was glaucoma (12/31, 39%), and the risk of glaucomatous visual acuity loss was 15% at 2 years and 27% at 3 years. Prior trabeculectomy was associated with a higher rate of vision loss from glaucoma (HR = 3.25, P = .04). CONCLUSION: Glaucoma is the primary reason for loss of visual acuity after KPro implantation. Conditions necessitating primary KPro surgery are associated with more frequent all-cause vision loss. Prospective trials are necessary to better determine which clinical features best predict KPro success.
PURPOSE: To identify predictors of visual outcomes following Boston type 1 Keratoprosthesis (KPro) implantation. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: Data regarding preoperative clinical and demographic characteristics and postoperative course were collected. PATIENTS: Fifty-nine eyes of 59 adult patients who underwent KPro implantation between January 2006 and March 2012 at a single tertiary care center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative factors associated with all-cause and glaucoma-related loss of visual acuity from the best postoperative visual acuity noted. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 59 eyes (88%) achieved improved vision post implantation, with 7 eyes failing to gain vision as a result of pre-existing glaucoma (n = 4) or retino-choroidal disease (n = 3). Twenty-one eyes (21/52, 40%) maintained their best-ever visual acuity at last visit (mean follow-up period was 37.8 months). The likelihood of maintaining best-ever vision was 71% at 1 year, 59% at 2 years, and 48% at 3 years. Primary KPro implantation was associated with a higher likelihood of losing best-ever vision as compared to KPro implantation as a repeat corneal procedure (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.06; P = 006). The main reasons for postimplantation vision loss was glaucoma (12/31, 39%), and the risk of glaucomatous visual acuity loss was 15% at 2 years and 27% at 3 years. Prior trabeculectomy was associated with a higher rate of vision loss from glaucoma (HR = 3.25, P = .04). CONCLUSION:Glaucoma is the primary reason for loss of visual acuity after KPro implantation. Conditions necessitating primary KPro surgery are associated with more frequent all-cause vision loss. Prospective trials are necessary to better determine which clinical features best predict KPro success.
Authors: Albert Santos; Luzia Diegues Silva; Luciene Barbosa de Sousa; Denise de Freitas; Lauro Augusto de Oliveira Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep Date: 2017-03-14
Authors: Kai B Kang; Faris I Karas; Ruju Rai; Joelle A Hallak; Joann J Kang; Jose de la Cruz; Maria S Cortina Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240