| Literature DB >> 27121659 |
Nobuhito Ishii1,2, Takefumi Yamaguchi1, Hiroyuki Yazu1, Yoshiyuki Satake1, Akitoshi Yoshida2, Jun Shimazaki1.
Abstract
Postoperative endothelial cell loss leads to graft failure after corneal transplantation, and is one of the important issues for long-term prognosis. The objective of this study was to identify clinical factors affecting graft survival and postoperative endothelial cell density (ECD) after Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). A total of 198 consecutive Japanese patients (225 eyes) who underwent DSAEK were analysed using Cox proportional hazard regression and multiple linear regression models. The candidate factors included recipient age; gender; diagnosis; pre-existing iris damage state, scored based on its severity; the number of previous intraocular surgeries; graft ECD; graft diameter; simultaneous cataract surgery; surgeons experience; intraoperative iris damage; postoperative rebubbling; and graft rejection. Eyes with higher pre-existing iris damage score and more number of previous intraocular surgery had a significantly higher risk of graft failure (HR = 8.53; P < 0.0001, and HR = 2.66; P = 0.026, respectively). Higher pre-existing iris damage score, lower graft ECD, and smaller graft diameter were identified as significant predisposing factors for lower postoperative ECD. The results show that iris damage status before DSAEK may be clinically useful in predicting the postoperative course. Avoiding intraoperative iris damage, especially in eyes with low ECD can change the prognosis of future DSAEK.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27121659 PMCID: PMC4848492 DOI: 10.1038/srep25276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Demographics of all patients.
| Recipient characteristics | Donor characteristics | Intra- and postoperative characteristics | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients, n | 225 | Mean age (years old ± SD) | 65.2 ± 11.1 | Simultaneous CS, n (%) | 82 (36) |
| Male, n (%) | 66 (29) | 65≤, n (%) | 129 (57) | Lens status/IOL fixation | |
| Mean age (years old ± SD) | 69.7 ± 12.1 | Imported graft, n (%) | 172 (76) | Phakia | 0(0) |
| 65≤, n (%) | 173 (77) | Graft ECD(cells/mm2) | AC IOL | 0(0) | |
| History of diabetes, n (%) | 21 (9) | mean ± SD | 2651 ± 322.8 | Capsular bag | 208(92) |
| Indication, n (%) | 2500≤, n (%) | 149 (66) | TS-IOL | 17(8) | |
| LI-BK | 81 (36) | Graft diameter (mm), n (%) | Experienced surgeon, n (%) | 110 (49) | |
| PBK/ABK | 54 (24) | 7 | 4 (2) | Intraoperative iris damage | 27 (12) |
| FECD | 26 (12) | 7.25 | 1 (1) | Postoperative re-bubbling, n (%) | |
| Others | 64 (28) | 7.5 | 13 (6) | None | 194 (86) |
| Pre-existing Iris damage score, n (%) | 7.75 | 46 (20) | Once | 23 (10) | |
| 0 | 105 (47) | 8 | 136 (60) | Twice | 6 (3) |
| 1 | 61 (27) | 8.25 | 18 (8) | Thrice | 2 (1) |
| 2 | 28 (13) | 8.5 | 7 (3) | Rejection episodes, n (%) | 8 (4) |
| 3 | 20 (9) | ||||
| 4 | 11 (5) | ||||
| Previous intraocular surgeries, n(%) | |||||
| None | 78 (35) | ||||
| Once | 108 (48) | ||||
| Twice | 30 (13) | ||||
| Thrice < | 9 (4) | ||||
SD: standard deviation, LI-BK: laser-iridotomy-related bullous keratopathy, PBK: pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, ABK: aphakic bullous keratopathy, FECD: Fuchs’ endothelial corneal dystrophy, ECD: endothelial cell density, CS: cataract surgery, IOL: intraocular lens, AC IOL: anterior chamber IOL, TS-IOL: transscleral IOL fixation.
Figure 1Iris damage scoring methods.
Iris damage (white arrows) was scored based on preoperative slit-lamp microscopy and iris photograph using infrared light as follows: 0, no iris damage; 1, iris damage limited to only one quadrant: 2, iris damage in two quadrants: 3, iris damage in three quadrants: 4, iris damage in four quadrants. Intraoperative iris damage was assessed and regarded as one of independent factors.
Association between baseline factors and graft failure in all patients.
| Baseline Factors | No. | Univariate Models | Multifactorial Model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | P Value | HR | 95% CI | P Value | ||
| Gender | |||||||
| Female | 159 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Male | 66 | 0.8 | 0.35–1.63 | 0.55 | 0.49 | 0.19–1.16 | 0.11 |
| Age at surgery (years old) | |||||||
| <65 | 52 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 65≤ | 173 | 0.91 | 0.44–2.06 | 0.82 | 0.87 | 0.37–2.21 | 0.77 |
| History of diabetes | |||||||
| No | 204 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 21 | 1.13 | 0.27–3.15 | 0.85 | 1.08 | 0.22–5.14 | 0.92 |
| Indication | |||||||
| FECD | 26 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| LI-BK | 81 | 1.24 | 0.39–5.43 | 0.73 | 0.99 | 0.27–4.79 | 0.99 |
| PBK/ABK | 54 | 0.66 | 0.15–3.35 | 0.59 | 0.29 | 0.05–1.81 | 0.18 |
| Others | 64 | 2.39 | 0.8–10.3 | 0.13 | 1.56 | 0.38–8.06 | 0.55 |
| Pre-existing iris damage score | |||||||
| 0 | 105 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 1 + 2 | 89 | 2.02 | 0.83–5.38 | 0.12 | 1.7 | 0.57–5.27 | 0.34 |
| 3 + 4 | 31 | 8.53 | 3.6–22.4 | <0.0001 | 7.57 | 2.57–24.3 | 0.0002 |
| Number of previous intraocular surgeries | |||||||
| <Once | 186 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Twice≤ | 39 | 2.66 | 1.25–5.31 | 0.026 | 1.16 | 0.43–3.04 | 0.77 |
| Donor age (years old) | |||||||
| <65 | 96 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 65≤ | 129 | 1.54 | 0.78–3.19 | 0.22 | 1.32 | 0.6–3.01 | 0.49 |
| Graft | |||||||
| Domestic | 53 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Imported | 172 | 0.96 | 0.47–2.18 | 0.92 | 1.23 | 0.49–3.29 | 0.66 |
| Graft ECD (cells/mm2) | |||||||
| 2500≤ | 149 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| <2500 | 76 | 1.97 | 0.99–3.83 | 0.05 | 1.68 | 0.78–3.62 | 0.18 |
| Graft diameter (mm) | |||||||
| 8≤ | 161 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| <8 | 64 | 0.98 | 0.46–1.96 | 0.96 | 1.13 | 0.5–2.43 | 0.75 |
| Simultaneous CS | |||||||
| Yes | 82 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| No | 143 | 1.78 | 0.87–4.02 | 0.12 | 1.43 | 0.58–3.78 | 0.45 |
| IOL position | |||||||
| Capsular bag | 208 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| TS-IOL | 17 | 2.53 | 0.86–6.02 | 0.086 | 3.88 | 1.03–12.4 | 0.046 |
| Experienced surgeon | |||||||
| Yes | 110 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| No | 115 | 1.11 | 0.57–2.18 | 0.76 | 2.51 | 1.04–6.09 | 0.042 |
| Intraoperative iris damage | |||||||
| No | 198 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 27 | 1.45 | 0.54–3.26 | 0.43 | 1.43 | 0.43–4.49 | 0.55 |
| Postoperative re-bubbling | |||||||
| No | 194 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 31 | 2 | 0.85–4.21 | 0.11 | 2.71 | 1.06–6.32 | 0.037 |
| Rejection | |||||||
| No | 217 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Yes | 8 | 1.53 | 0.25–5.04 | 0.58 | 1.49 | 0.22–6.04 | 0.63 |
Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.
HR: hazard ratio, CI: confidence interval, FECD: Fuchs’ endothelial corneal dystrophy, LI-BK: laser-iridotomy-related bullous keratopathy, PBK: pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, ABK: aphakic bullous keratopathy, ECD: endothelial cell density, CS: cataract surgery, IOL: intraocular lens, TS-IOL: transscleral suturing of intraocular lens.
Association between baseline factors and postoperative ECD in all patients.
Linear regression analysis. FECD: Fuchs’ endothelial corneal dystrophy, PBK: pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, ABK: aphakic bullous keratopathy, LI-BK: laser-iridotomy-related bullous keratopathy, ECD: endothelial cell density, CS: cataract surgery.
Figure 2Kaplan Meier survival curves stratified by iris damage score and different aetiologies.
In all subjects (a) and the subjects with LI-BK (c) PBK (d) and other aetiologies (e) there were significant differences in survival rates among the subjects with no iris damage or low iris damage score (1–2) and those with high iris damage scores (3–4). In eyes with FECD, no patient had iris damage. Others included failed graft after PKP (12 eyes) and failed DSAEK (10 eyes), chronic uveitis (6 eyes), birth injury (5 eyes), and other causes such as endotheliitis.
Figure 3Endothelial cell loss after DSAEK classified by iris damage score.
A biexponential model was fitted to the ECD classified by the iris damage score. The decrease in the ECD was greater in the group with iris damage scores of 3–4 than the groups with iris damage score of 0 and 1–2.