Cornea · 2021
Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction After Corneal Neurotization.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rafailov Leon, Kim Jane S, Wisely Clayton Ellis, Espana Edgar M, Soifer Matias, Leyngold Ilya M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes of corneal neurotization (CN) and determine patient perception of postoperative results.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study involving 29 eyes in 28 patients who underwent CN. Chart review data included demographic and clinical history; ophthalmic examination including visual acuity, ocular surface quality, and corneal sensation; surgical technique; and postoperative course. Subjective self-reported patient outcomes of surgical success were also assessed. Only eyes with at least 6 months of follow-up were included in the statistical analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 24 eyes and 23 patients were included in statistical analyses. The median postoperative follow-up time was 12.2 months (interquartile range 10.9-18.5 mo). Twenty-three eyes (92%) achieved improvement in ocular surface quality. Eleven of 13 (85%) demonstrated healing of persistent epithelial defects at their last follow-up. Patients gained a median of 2.3 cm in Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometry measurements of sensation. No significant difference was found between preoperative and postoperative visual acuity. All 17 patients who provided self-assessment of their surgical outcome indicated they would undergo CN again if given the choice. Most of the patients reported that the postoperative pain was tolerable, with a median pain score of 3.0 on a 10-point scale (interquartile range 0.0-4.0). Sixteen patients (94%) reported full or partial return of skin sensation along the donor nerve distribution.
CONCLUSIONS: CN provides improvement in corneal health and sensibility, with high patient satisfaction and minimal postoperative pain and morbidity.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study involving 29 eyes in 28 patients who underwent CN. Chart review data included demographic and clinical history; ophthalmic examination including visual acuity, ocular surface quality, and corneal sensation; surgical technique; and postoperative course. Subjective self-reported patient outcomes of surgical success were also assessed. Only eyes with at least 6 months of follow-up were included in the statistical analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 24 eyes and 23 patients were included in statistical analyses. The median postoperative follow-up time was 12.2 months (interquartile range 10.9-18.5 mo). Twenty-three eyes (92%) achieved improvement in ocular surface quality. Eleven of 13 (85%) demonstrated healing of persistent epithelial defects at their last follow-up. Patients gained a median of 2.3 cm in Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometry measurements of sensation. No significant difference was found between preoperative and postoperative visual acuity. All 17 patients who provided self-assessment of their surgical outcome indicated they would undergo CN again if given the choice. Most of the patients reported that the postoperative pain was tolerable, with a median pain score of 3.0 on a 10-point scale (interquartile range 0.0-4.0). Sixteen patients (94%) reported full or partial return of skin sensation along the donor nerve distribution.
CONCLUSIONS: CN provides improvement in corneal health and sensibility, with high patient satisfaction and minimal postoperative pain and morbidity.