Vestnik oftalmologii · 2018
[Comparative analysis of modern methods of preparing donor material for endothelial keratoplasty].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Оригинал на русском
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.
Trufanov S V, Salovarova E P, Osipyan G A, Fyodorov A A, Vedmedenko I I
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate various methods of stripping Descemet's membrane of a donor corneoscleral flap for Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 60 corneoscleral flaps (mean donor age was 62.9 years) from the eye bank of Research Institute of Eye Diseases, which were not suitable for clinical use due to positive serological results. Four alternative methods of donor material dissection in preparation for DMEK were compared: SCUBA (group A), our newly suggested method utilizing intracapsular ring (group B), 'liquid bubble' (group C), 'big bubble' (group D). Parameters under evaluation were mean transplant preparation time, density of endothelial cells before and after dissection, presence of complications during detachment of Descemet's membrane.
RESULTS: Mean detachment time in group A was 8.5 min, in group B - 7 min, in group C - 8 min, and in group D - 5 min. Loss of endothelial cells as compared with baseline was in average 10.5% in group A, 9.3% in group B, 10.7% in group C, and 10.3% in group D. Group A had two cases with complications occurring during separation of Descemet's membrane, group B had one such case, group C - 2 cases, and group D - 3 cases. Histologic examination confirmed absence of stromal fibers on the detached Descemet's membrane in groups A, B and C.
CONCLUSION: Among the described methods of preparing donor material for DMEK surgery, all except 'big bubble' proved equal in terms of resulting transplant quality. The 'big bubble' dissection technique requires more time to complete, while the resulting transplant has stromal fibers. Our newly suggested method of Descemet's membrane stripping that utilizes intracapsular ring proved safe and effective alternative for preparing donor material for DMEK.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 60 corneoscleral flaps (mean donor age was 62.9 years) from the eye bank of Research Institute of Eye Diseases, which were not suitable for clinical use due to positive serological results. Four alternative methods of donor material dissection in preparation for DMEK were compared: SCUBA (group A), our newly suggested method utilizing intracapsular ring (group B), 'liquid bubble' (group C), 'big bubble' (group D). Parameters under evaluation were mean transplant preparation time, density of endothelial cells before and after dissection, presence of complications during detachment of Descemet's membrane.
RESULTS: Mean detachment time in group A was 8.5 min, in group B - 7 min, in group C - 8 min, and in group D - 5 min. Loss of endothelial cells as compared with baseline was in average 10.5% in group A, 9.3% in group B, 10.7% in group C, and 10.3% in group D. Group A had two cases with complications occurring during separation of Descemet's membrane, group B had one such case, group C - 2 cases, and group D - 3 cases. Histologic examination confirmed absence of stromal fibers on the detached Descemet's membrane in groups A, B and C.
CONCLUSION: Among the described methods of preparing donor material for DMEK surgery, all except 'big bubble' proved equal in terms of resulting transplant quality. The 'big bubble' dissection technique requires more time to complete, while the resulting transplant has stromal fibers. Our newly suggested method of Descemet's membrane stripping that utilizes intracapsular ring proved safe and effective alternative for preparing donor material for DMEK.