Archivos de la Sociedad Espanola de Oftalmologia · 2012
[Relationship between donor-receptor interface and visual acuity in DSAEK].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Barrajón Rodríguez A, Celis Sánchez J, Mesa Varona D, Avendaño Cantos E, Tenías Burillo J M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between best corrected visual acuity and donor-recipient interface resulting after Descemet's Stripping with Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK).
METHODS: Retrospective review of 46 clinical histories after DSAEK intervention in which 22 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (two with bilateral DSAEK), were studied. All were operated on by the same ophthalmologist from January 2010 until April 2011. Surgical indications were: 19 (72.2%) bullous keratopathy, 3 (12.5%) Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, and 2 (8.3%) previous failed keratoplasty. The visual acuity (VA) was recorded preoperatively, and at three and six months after the operation; the latter two being compared with the interface between donor and recipient after DSAEK measured in a Scheimpflug corneal topography camera (Pentacam(®) model).
RESULTS: After DSAEK surgery 19 eyes had improved visual acuity at three months, and 20 eyes at six months (P<.001). This improvement was compared with the decrease in optical density of the resulting donor-receptor interface, with apositive and significant relationship being found between them (Rho interface 3 months, and improved AV 6 months 0.44, P<.001). However, the interface is negatively and significantly related with visual acuity (Rho 3 m: -0.41, P=.045). Also, patients who had a denser stroma had a worse postoperative visual acuity in relative terms when compared with those who had a less damaged stroma.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing DSAEK with worse preoperative visual acuity had a greater improvement visual in absolute values and however, they may have achieved a lower relative visual acuity than could be related to a higher refractive interface, as a result of a more damaged preoperative corneal stroma.
METHODS: Retrospective review of 46 clinical histories after DSAEK intervention in which 22 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (two with bilateral DSAEK), were studied. All were operated on by the same ophthalmologist from January 2010 until April 2011. Surgical indications were: 19 (72.2%) bullous keratopathy, 3 (12.5%) Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, and 2 (8.3%) previous failed keratoplasty. The visual acuity (VA) was recorded preoperatively, and at three and six months after the operation; the latter two being compared with the interface between donor and recipient after DSAEK measured in a Scheimpflug corneal topography camera (Pentacam(®) model).
RESULTS: After DSAEK surgery 19 eyes had improved visual acuity at three months, and 20 eyes at six months (P<.001). This improvement was compared with the decrease in optical density of the resulting donor-receptor interface, with apositive and significant relationship being found between them (Rho interface 3 months, and improved AV 6 months 0.44, P<.001). However, the interface is negatively and significantly related with visual acuity (Rho 3 m: -0.41, P=.045). Also, patients who had a denser stroma had a worse postoperative visual acuity in relative terms when compared with those who had a less damaged stroma.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing DSAEK with worse preoperative visual acuity had a greater improvement visual in absolute values and however, they may have achieved a lower relative visual acuity than could be related to a higher refractive interface, as a result of a more damaged preoperative corneal stroma.