Cornea · 2006
Astigmatism after mersilene and nylon suture use for 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.
Landau D, Siganos C S, Mechoulam H, Solomon A, Frucht-Pery J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate postoperative astigmatism after the use of Mersilene and nylon sutures for penetrating keratoplasty.
METHODS: Two groups of 12 patients each (age, 20-50 years) suffering from keratoconus underwent penetrating keratoplasty. Continuous suturing combined with 12 interrupted sutures was used in each case: Mersilene 11-0 sutures were used in group 1, whereas nylon 10-0 sutures were used in group 2. Sutures were removed to control astigmatism when required. All patients were monitored for 36 months.
RESULTS: During the follow-up period, sutures were removed in each eye as indicated by astigmatism or breakage. In group 1 (Mersilene 11-0 sutures), no breakage of sutures was recorded. In group 2 (nylon 10-0 sutures), breakage of sutures was recorded in 11 of 12 cases. However, continuous sutures were removed in 2 patients in group 2. After the first year, the astigmatism remained within +/-1.00 diopter in all except 1 patient in group 1 and in 5 patients in group 2. No suture-related complications were recorded except for scarring with photophobia in 1 patient in group 1 and suture breakage in 11 eyes in group 2.
CONCLUSION: Mersilene sutures can provide a stable postoperative astigmatism, whereas nylon sutures have a tendency to break and cause changes in corneal astigmatism.
METHODS: Two groups of 12 patients each (age, 20-50 years) suffering from keratoconus underwent penetrating keratoplasty. Continuous suturing combined with 12 interrupted sutures was used in each case: Mersilene 11-0 sutures were used in group 1, whereas nylon 10-0 sutures were used in group 2. Sutures were removed to control astigmatism when required. All patients were monitored for 36 months.
RESULTS: During the follow-up period, sutures were removed in each eye as indicated by astigmatism or breakage. In group 1 (Mersilene 11-0 sutures), no breakage of sutures was recorded. In group 2 (nylon 10-0 sutures), breakage of sutures was recorded in 11 of 12 cases. However, continuous sutures were removed in 2 patients in group 2. After the first year, the astigmatism remained within +/-1.00 diopter in all except 1 patient in group 1 and in 5 patients in group 2. No suture-related complications were recorded except for scarring with photophobia in 1 patient in group 1 and suture breakage in 11 eyes in group 2.
CONCLUSION: Mersilene sutures can provide a stable postoperative astigmatism, whereas nylon sutures have a tendency to break and cause changes in corneal astigmatism.