T Röck1, J Hofmann2, S Thaler2, M Bramkamp3, K U Bartz-Schmidt2, E Yoeruek2, D Röck2. 1. Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tübingen, Schleichstr. 12, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. tobias.roeck@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tübingen, Schleichstr. 12, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. 3. Department of General Medicine, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose was to assess the influence of donor and storage factors on the suitability of organ-cultured corneas for transplantation. METHODS: Data from 1340 donor corneas stored between 2009 and 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of different factors on the suitability of grafts for transplantation. RESULTS: Forty-one percent (553/1340) of corneas were discarded. The leading causes were medical contraindication (20.2 %) and poor endothelial quality (19.3 %). Donor age influenced suitability for transplantation significantly. Corneas from donors aged 80 years and older were more likely to be discarded because of endothelial insufficiency (P < 0.0001). The cause of donor death including infection and multiple organ dsyfunction syndrom (MODS) increased the risk of bacterial or fungal contamination during organ culture (P = 0.007 and P = 0.014, respectively). Prolonged time between death and enucleation was associated with an increased risk of unsuitability for transplantation (P < 0.0001). The amount of time between death and corneoscleral disc excision and duration of storage influenced the suitability for transplantation (P = 0.0007 and P < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Donor age, cause of death, storage time, death to enucleation and death to disc excision times influenced transplantation suitability. The percentage of discarded corneas may be reduced by shortening storage time, death to enucleation, and death to corneoscleral disc excision times. Setting a maximum donor age could reduce the percentage of discarded corneas. However, as long as there is a lack of donor corneas, we do not recommend any donor age limit.
PURPOSE: The purpose was to assess the influence of donor and storage factors on the suitability of organ-cultured corneas for transplantation. METHODS: Data from 1340 donor corneas stored between 2009 and 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of different factors on the suitability of grafts for transplantation. RESULTS: Forty-one percent (553/1340) of corneas were discarded. The leading causes were medical contraindication (20.2 %) and poor endothelial quality (19.3 %). Donor age influenced suitability for transplantation significantly. Corneas from donors aged 80 years and older were more likely to be discarded because of endothelial insufficiency (P < 0.0001). The cause of donordeath including infection and multiple organ dsyfunction syndrom (MODS) increased the risk of bacterial or fungal contamination during organ culture (P = 0.007 and P = 0.014, respectively). Prolonged time between death and enucleation was associated with an increased risk of unsuitability for transplantation (P < 0.0001). The amount of time between death and corneoscleral disc excision and duration of storage influenced the suitability for transplantation (P = 0.0007 and P < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION:Donor age, cause of death, storage time, death to enucleation and death to disc excision times influenced transplantation suitability. The percentage of discarded corneas may be reduced by shortening storage time, death to enucleation, and death to corneoscleral disc excision times. Setting a maximum donor age could reduce the percentage of discarded corneas. However, as long as there is a lack of donor corneas, we do not recommend any donor age limit.
Entities:
Keywords:
Corneal endothelial cells; Corneal organ culture; Corneal storage; Corneal suitability for transplantation
Authors: W John Armitage; Mark N A Jones; Isaac Zambrano; Fiona Carley; Derek M Tole Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: G Thuret; A Carricajo; A C Vautrin; H Raberin; S Acquart; O Garraud; P Gain; G Aubert Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: David B Rein; Ping Zhang; Kathleen E Wirth; Paul P Lee; Thomas J Hoerger; Nancy McCall; Ronald Klein; James M Tielsch; Sandeep Vijan; Jinan Saaddine Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2006-12
Authors: Hilde P A van der Aa; Hannie C Comijs; Brenda W J H Penninx; Ger H M B van Rens; Ruth M A van Nispen Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-01-20 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Dawidson Assis Gomes; Alfredo Miranda de Goes; Thaís Maria da Mata Martins; Juliana Lott de Carvalho; Pricila da Silva Cunha Journal: Stem Cell Rev Rep Date: 2022-03-05 Impact factor: 6.692
Authors: Tobias Röck; Karl Ulrich Bartz-Schmidt; Johanna Landenberger; Matthias Bramkamp; Daniel Röck Journal: Ann Transplant Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 1.530
Authors: Tobias Röck; Johanna Landenberger; Michael Buhl; Efdal Yoeruek; Karl Ulrich Bartz-Schmidt; Matthias Bramkamp; Gunnar Blumenstock; Daniel Röck Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: Tobias Röck; Robert Beck; Stefan Jürgens; Karl Ulrich Bartz-Schmidt; Matthias Bramkamp; Sebastian Thaler; Daniel Röck Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: Tobias Röck; Johanna Landenberger; Matthias Bramkamp; Karl Ulrich Bartz-Schmidt; Daniel Röck Journal: Ann Transplant Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 1.530