Literature DB >> 26088620

Comparison of Sulfur Hexafluoride 20% versus Air Tamponade in Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty.

Jose L Güell1, Merce Morral2, Oscar Gris2, Daniel Elies3, Felicidad Manero2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes using 20% sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) versus 100% air as a tamponade for graft attachment in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).
DESIGN: Retrospective, comparative, interventional case series. PARTICIPANTS: Pseudophakic patients with Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy or pseudophakic bullous keratopathy that underwent DMEK using either 20% SF6 (group 1; 42 eyes) or 100% air (group 2; 39 eyes) tamponade between April 2010 and August 2011.
METHODS: A bimanual infusion technique was used to introduce and position the donor endothelium-Descemet membrane graft tissue. Outcome measures were analyzed at the following time points: before surgery, 3 and 6 months after surgery, and at yearly intervals up to at least 3 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction, pachymetry, central endothelial cell count (cECC), complications, and rebubbling rates.
RESULTS: Three years after surgery, mean CDVA improved from 0.48±0.45 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) to 0.04±0.23 in group 1 (P < 0.001) and from 0.67±0.45 logMAR to 0.09±0.13 logMAR in group 2 (P < 0.001). The percentage of eyes with CDVA of 20/25 or more was 85.71% (36/42 eyes) in group 1 and 82.05% (32/39 eyes) in group 2 (P = 0.43). Mean preoperative cECCs and at last follow-up were: group 1, 2525±338 cells/mm(2) and 1758 ± 398 cells/mm(2) (mean cell loss, 30±11%; P = 0.008); and group 2, 2492±204 cells/mm(2) and 1678±373 cells/mm(2) (mean cell loss, 32±13%; P = 0.008). Endothelial cell loss was similar in both groups (P = 0.65). Intracameral air reinjection was needed in 1 patient in group 1 (2.38%) and in 5 patients in group 2 (12.8%). The rebubbling rate was significantly higher in group 2 (P = 0.004). No episodes of immunologic graft rejection were documented.
CONCLUSIONS: Although clinical outcomes and corneal endothelial cell loss were similar in both groups, tamponade with 20% SF6 yielded a significantly lower incidence of graft detachments that may warrant its routine use in DMEK. Longer-term, randomized studies are needed to recommend this approach fully.
Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26088620     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.05.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  12 in total

1.  "PI-less DMEK": results of Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) without a peripheral iridotomy.

Authors:  Eitan Livny; Irit Bahar; Issac Levy; Michael Mimouni; Yoav Nahum
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  [Treatment of corneal endothelial disorders by DMEK and UT-DSAEK. Indications, complications, results and follow-up].

Authors:  B Bachmann; F Schaub; C Cursiefen
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 3.  [Critical endothelial procedures during posterior lamellar graft preparation and transplantation].

Authors:  T A Fuchsluger; F E Kruse; G Geerling
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  "Endothelium-Out" and "Endothelium-In" Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) Graft Insertion Techniques: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Hon Shing Ong; Hla M Htoon; Marcus Ang; Jodhbir S Mehta
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-06-14

5.  Detection of graft detachments immediately following Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) comparing time domain and spectral domain OCT.

Authors:  Sebastian Siebelmann; Uta Gehlsen; Carolin Le Blanc; Tisha Prabriputaloong Stanzel; Claus Cursiefen; Philipp Steven
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Recipient Factors Associated With Graft Detachment of a Subsequent Eye in Sequential Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty.

Authors:  Kyeong Hwan Kim; Marius A Tijunelis; Yunshu Zhou; David C Musch; Christopher T Hood; Bradford L Tannen; Shahzad I Mian
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.651

7.  Gas-Graft Coverage After DMEK: A Clinically Validated Numeric Study.

Authors:  Jan O Pralits; Mark Alberti; Javier Cabreizo
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Descemet Stripping Automated Keratoplasty - Outcome of One Single Surgeon's More Than 200 Initial Consecutive Cases.

Authors:  Christina Jansen; Madeleine Zetterberg
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-02

Review 9.  Efficacy and safety of Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Saiqun Li; Liangping Liu; Wei Wang; Ting Huang; Xingwu Zhong; Jin Yuan; Lingyi Liang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Successful Treatment of Post-Phacoemulsification Descemet's Membrane Detachment Assessed by Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography: A Case Report.

Authors:  Ayaka Doi; Tadamichi Akagi; Akitaka Tsujikawa
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.