Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2017
Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for graft failure following penetrating keratoplasty.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Heinzelmann Sonja, Böhringer Daniel, Eberwein Philipp, Lapp Thabo, Reinhard Thomas, Maier Philip
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is superior to penetrating keratoplasty (PK) in terms of visual rehabilitation, intraoperative safety and risk of rejection. Therefore, it seems reasonable to perform DMEK in eyes with endothelial failure following PK. We herein report our first clinical results.
METHODS: Nineteen eyes with endothelial graft failure following PK were treated with DMEK. The majority of these eyes (12) had limited visual potential. The major indication for DMEK was pain relief in patients with bullous keratopathy. Visual acuity (VA), central corneal thickness (CCT), rate of graft dislocations, graft survival, graft rejections and other complications were extracted from the medical records.
RESULTS: Although comorbidities limiting VA were present in 12 of the 19 eyes, VA increased from 0.05 to 0.1 (median) in 16 eyes. CCT decreased substantially (range 63-363 μm). Rebubbling was necessary in five eyes with incomplete graft adherence. There were two immunologic graft reactions and three graft failures. No major complications like endophthalmitis or expulsive bleeding occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: DMEK is feasible to treat endothelial graft failure following PK. This is even true for eyes with limited visual potential.
METHODS: Nineteen eyes with endothelial graft failure following PK were treated with DMEK. The majority of these eyes (12) had limited visual potential. The major indication for DMEK was pain relief in patients with bullous keratopathy. Visual acuity (VA), central corneal thickness (CCT), rate of graft dislocations, graft survival, graft rejections and other complications were extracted from the medical records.
RESULTS: Although comorbidities limiting VA were present in 12 of the 19 eyes, VA increased from 0.05 to 0.1 (median) in 16 eyes. CCT decreased substantially (range 63-363 μm). Rebubbling was necessary in five eyes with incomplete graft adherence. There were two immunologic graft reactions and three graft failures. No major complications like endophthalmitis or expulsive bleeding occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: DMEK is feasible to treat endothelial graft failure following PK. This is even true for eyes with limited visual potential.