Literature DB >> 28247507

Development of retrocorneal membrane following pig-to-monkey penetrating keratoplasty.

Whayoung Lee1, Alex Mammen2, Deepinder K Dhaliwal2, Cassandra Long1, Yuko Miyagawa1, David Ayares3, David K C Cooper1, Hidetaka Hara1.   

Abstract

Recent reports of long-term survival after wild-type (WT) pig-to-monkey corneal xenotransplantation are encouraging. We experienced the rapid development of retrocorneal membranes, a rare complication after corneal allotransplantation (although seen in infants and young children). The original specific aim of the study was to determine the factors associated with successful (young) pig corneal transplantation in monkeys. However, when it was obvious that retrocorneal membranes rapidly developed, our aims became to determine the factors involved in its development after both WT and Genetically engineered (GE ) pig corneal xenotransplantation and to investigate the characteristics of the retrocorneal membrane. Rhesus monkeys were recipients of penetrating keratoplasty using WT and GE pigs (n=2, respectively, 1-3 months old). Local/systemic steroids were administered for 3 months. Grafts were evaluated by slit lamp for corneal transparency, edema, and neovascularization. Hematoxylin and eosin, Masson trichrome staining, and immunohistochemical analysis were performed. Gal staining was also carried out to distinguish the origin of the membrane. All penetrating keratoplasty recipients developed fibrous retrocorneal membranes in the early post-transplantation period, regardless of whether the graft was from a WT or GE pig. There were no features of rejection, with no cell infiltrate in the graft or anterior chamber during the three-month follow-up. There was no difference in the clinical course between the two groups (WT or GE corneas). Immunohistochemistry indicated that the retrocorneal membranes were CK negative, α-SMA positive, and vimentin positive, suggesting that they were of fibrous (keratocytic) origin. Also, the membrane was Gal positive, suggesting that it is derived from pig cornea. Following pig-to-monkey corneal xenotransplantation, we report that retrocorneal membranes are derived from donor pig keratocytes. Prevention of retrocorneal membranes will be necessary to achieve successful corneal xenotransplantation.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cornea; monkey; penetrating keratoplasty; pig; porcine; retrocorneal membrane; xenotransplantation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28247507      PMCID: PMC5334780          DOI: 10.1111/xen.12276

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Xenotransplantation        ISSN: 0908-665X            Impact factor:   3.907


  29 in total

Review 1.  Xenotransplantation--the future of corneal transplantation?

Authors:  Hidetaka Hara; David K C Cooper
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.651

2.  Risk factors for complications following pediatric epikeratoplasty.

Authors:  K P Cheng; D A Hiles; A W Biglan; M C Pettapiece; S C Behler; M B Moore
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Retrocorneal membrane after penetrating keratoplasty.

Authors:  T Lifshitz; T Oshry; G Rosenthal
Journal:  Ophthalmic Surg Lasers       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr

Review 4.  Corneal blindness and xenotransplantation.

Authors:  Vladimir Lamm; Hidetaka Hara; Alex Mammen; Deepinder Dhaliwal; David K C Cooper
Journal:  Xenotransplantation       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 3.907

5.  Efficacy of pig-to-rhesus lamellar corneal xenotransplantation.

Authors:  Hyuk Jin Choi; Mee Kum Kim; Hyun Ju Lee; Jung Hwa Ko; So Hee Jeong; Jae-Il Lee; Byoung-Chol Oh; Hee Jung Kang; Won Ryang Wee
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Retrocorneal fibrous membranes in failed corneal grafts.

Authors:  I Kremer; C J Rapuano; E J Cohen; P R Laibson; R C Eagle
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-04-15       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  Initial in vitro investigation of the human immune response to corneal cells from genetically engineered pigs.

Authors:  Hidetaka Hara; Naoko Koike; Cassandra Long; Jordan Piluek; Danny S Roh; Nirmala SundarRaj; James L Funderburgh; Yoshiaki Mizuguchi; Kumiko Isse; Carol J Phelps; Suyapa F Ball; David L Ayares; David K C Cooper
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  WZS-pig is a potential donor alternative in corneal xenotransplantation.

Authors:  Pan Zhiqiang; Sun Cun; Jie Ying; Wang Ningli; Wang Li
Journal:  Xenotransplantation       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.907

9.  Histopathological findings of failed grafts following Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).

Authors:  Hind Alkatan; Ali Al-Rajhi; Ali Al-Shehri; Ali Khairi
Journal:  Saudi J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-06-01

Review 10.  [Suitability of newborn donor corneal graft in penetrating keratoplasty].

Authors:  J Belmonte; R Moral; S Vallcanera
Journal:  Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol       Date:  2008-04
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Xenotransplantation: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Burcin Ekser; Ping Li; David K C Cooper
Journal:  Curr Opin Organ Transplant       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 2.640

2.  Generation of vascular chimerism within donor organs.

Authors:  Shahar Cohen; Shirly Partouche; Michael Gurevich; Vladimir Tennak; Vadym Mezhybovsky; Dmitry Azarov; Sarit Soffer-Hirschberg; Benny Hovav; Hagit Niv-Drori; Chana Weiss; Adi Borovich; Guy Cohen; Avital Wertheimer; Golan Shukrun; Moshe Israeli; Vered Yahalom; Dorit Leshem-Lev; Leor Perl; Ran Kornowski; Arnon Wiznitzer; Ana Tobar; Meora Feinmesser; Eytan Mor; Eli Atar; Eviatar Nesher
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.