Winston Chamberlain1, Charles C Lin2, Ariana Austin3, Nicholas Schubach1, Jameson Clover4, Stephen D McLeod5, Travis C Porco6, Thomas M Lietman7, Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer8. 1. Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. 2. Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 3. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, California. 4. Lions VisionGift, Portland, Oregon. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California. 6. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, California; Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California. 7. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California; Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California. 8. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: jennifer.rose-nussbaumer@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in the treatment of corneal endothelial dysfunction. DESIGN: Patient and outcome-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with damaged or diseased endothelium from Fuchs endothelial dystrophy or pseudophakic bullous keratopathy who were considered good candidates for DMEK or UT-DSAEK. METHODS: Study eyes were randomized by the eye bank to UT-DSAEK or DMEK 1 to 2 days before surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of the trial was best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included 3- and 12-month BSCVA; 3-, 6-, and 12-month endothelial cell counts; intraoperative and postoperative complications; and change in pachymetry. RESULTS: A total of 216 patients with endothelial dysfunction were screened, and 50 eyes of 38 patients were enrolled by 2 surgeons at Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon, and at Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. Overall, we found DMEK to have better visual acuity outcomes compared with UT-DSAEK after correcting for baseline visual acuity: compared with UT-DSAEK, those randomized to DMEK had 1.5 lines better BSCVA at 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-0.6 lines better; P = 0.002), 1.8 lines better BSCVA at 6 months (95% CI, 2.8-1.0 lines better; P < 0.001), and 1.4 lines better BSCVA at 12 months (95% CI, 2.2-0.7 lines better; P < 0.001). Average endothelial cell counts were 1963 cells/mm2 in DMEK and 2113 cells/mm2 in UT-DSAEK at 6 months (P = 0.17) and 1855 cells/mm2 in DMEK and 2070 cells/mm2 in UT-DSAEK at 12 months (P = 0.051). Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty had superior visual acuity results compared with UT-DSAEK at 3, 6, and 12 months in patients with isolated endothelial dysfunction with similar complication rates. Published by Elsevier Inc.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in the treatment of corneal endothelial dysfunction. DESIGN:Patient and outcome-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with damaged or diseased endothelium from Fuchs endothelial dystrophy or pseudophakic bullous keratopathy who were considered good candidates for DMEK or UT-DSAEK. METHODS: Study eyes were randomized by the eye bank to UT-DSAEK or DMEK 1 to 2 days before surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of the trial was best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included 3- and 12-month BSCVA; 3-, 6-, and 12-month endothelial cell counts; intraoperative and postoperative complications; and change in pachymetry. RESULTS: A total of 216 patients with endothelial dysfunction were screened, and 50 eyes of 38 patients were enrolled by 2 surgeons at Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon, and at Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. Overall, we found DMEK to have better visual acuity outcomes compared with UT-DSAEK after correcting for baseline visual acuity: compared with UT-DSAEK, those randomized to DMEK had 1.5 lines better BSCVA at 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-0.6 lines better; P = 0.002), 1.8 lines better BSCVA at 6 months (95% CI, 2.8-1.0 lines better; P < 0.001), and 1.4 lines better BSCVA at 12 months (95% CI, 2.2-0.7 lines better; P < 0.001). Average endothelial cell counts were 1963 cells/mm2 in DMEK and 2113 cells/mm2 in UT-DSAEK at 6 months (P = 0.17) and 1855 cells/mm2 in DMEK and 2070 cells/mm2 in UT-DSAEK at 12 months (P = 0.051). Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty had superior visual acuity results compared with UT-DSAEK at 3, 6, and 12 months in patients with isolated endothelial dysfunction with similar complication rates. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Matthew J Duggan; Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer; Charles C Lin; Ariana Austin; Paula C Labadzinzki; Winston D Chamberlain Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2019-02-16 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Katja C Iselin; Emily Greenan; Colin Hynes; Sandra Shaw; Tim Fulcher; William J Power; Barry Quill; Marc Guerin; Weng H Lee; Conor C Murphy Journal: Ir J Med Sci Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 1.568
Authors: Kristin E Hirabayashi; Winston Chamberlain; Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer; Ariana Austin; Laurel Stell; Charles C Lin Journal: Cornea Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 2.651
Authors: Grace E Dunbar; Michael Titus; Joshua D Stein; Tomas E Meijome; Shahzad I Mian; Maria A Woodward Journal: Cornea Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 3.152
Authors: Miles F Greenwald; Afshan A Nanji; John L Clements; Richard D Stutzman; Christopher G Stoeger; Winston D Chamberlain Journal: Cornea Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 3.152
Authors: Stephan Ong Tone; Viridiana Kocaba; Myriam Böhm; Adam Wylegala; Tomas L White; Ula V Jurkunas Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2020-05-08 Impact factor: 21.198