Cargando…

Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up

PURPOSE: Posterior lamellar corneal surgery is considered the standard of care for irreversible endothelial cell dysfunction. Pre‐cut grafts can be prepared either manually (Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty; DSEK) or mechanically (Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; DSA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Muijzer, Marc B., van Luijk, Chantal M., van den Bogaerdt, Antoon J., Kruit, Piet J., Groeneveld‐van Beek, Esther, Melles, Gerrit R.J., Wisse, Robert P.L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6850414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30803143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14074
_version_ 1783469419007049728
author Muijzer, Marc B.
van Luijk, Chantal M.
van den Bogaerdt, Antoon J.
Kruit, Piet J.
Groeneveld‐van Beek, Esther
Melles, Gerrit R.J.
Wisse, Robert P.L.
author_facet Muijzer, Marc B.
van Luijk, Chantal M.
van den Bogaerdt, Antoon J.
Kruit, Piet J.
Groeneveld‐van Beek, Esther
Melles, Gerrit R.J.
Wisse, Robert P.L.
author_sort Muijzer, Marc B.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Posterior lamellar corneal surgery is considered the standard of care for irreversible endothelial cell dysfunction. Pre‐cut grafts can be prepared either manually (Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty; DSEK) or mechanically (Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; DSAEK). We performed a head‐to‐head clinical comparison between DSEK and DSAEK grafts. METHODS: All DSEK and DSAEK procedures performed by two corneal specialists at the University Medical Center Utrecht from 1 January 2016 through 31 October 2016 were prospectively included. Pre‐cut grafts were delivered by two eye banks, which either exclusively prepared the DSEK or DSAEK grafts. Preoperative and postoperative measurements were obtained, and all surgical events and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 21 DSEK and 53 DSAEK procedures were included for analysis; the two groups were similar at baseline, with the exception of graft endothelial cell density, which was 2531 ± 67 versus 2748 ± 148 cells/mm(2), respectively (p < 0.001). At the one‐year follow‐up visit, corrected distance visual acuity and endothelial cell loss were similar between the groups. Mean pachymetry was significantly lower in the DSEK group (521 ± 39 versus 588 ± 59 μm; p < 0.001), whereas the rebubbling rate was significantly higher in the DSEK group (47.6% versus 18.9%; p = 0.001). Finally, three grafts in the DSEK group experienced failure compared to one graft in the DSAEK group (14% versus 1.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Manually dissected and microkeratome‐dissected grafts performed similarly with respect to vision and endothelial cell loss assessed one year after surgery. The higher incidence of graft failure among manually dissected (i.e. DSEK) grafts may be attributable to reduced relative thickness compared to DSAEK grafts and/or the resulting differences in tissue handling and the surgeon's learning curve.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6850414
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68504142019-11-18 Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up Muijzer, Marc B. van Luijk, Chantal M. van den Bogaerdt, Antoon J. Kruit, Piet J. Groeneveld‐van Beek, Esther Melles, Gerrit R.J. Wisse, Robert P.L. Acta Ophthalmol Original Articles PURPOSE: Posterior lamellar corneal surgery is considered the standard of care for irreversible endothelial cell dysfunction. Pre‐cut grafts can be prepared either manually (Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty; DSEK) or mechanically (Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; DSAEK). We performed a head‐to‐head clinical comparison between DSEK and DSAEK grafts. METHODS: All DSEK and DSAEK procedures performed by two corneal specialists at the University Medical Center Utrecht from 1 January 2016 through 31 October 2016 were prospectively included. Pre‐cut grafts were delivered by two eye banks, which either exclusively prepared the DSEK or DSAEK grafts. Preoperative and postoperative measurements were obtained, and all surgical events and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 21 DSEK and 53 DSAEK procedures were included for analysis; the two groups were similar at baseline, with the exception of graft endothelial cell density, which was 2531 ± 67 versus 2748 ± 148 cells/mm(2), respectively (p < 0.001). At the one‐year follow‐up visit, corrected distance visual acuity and endothelial cell loss were similar between the groups. Mean pachymetry was significantly lower in the DSEK group (521 ± 39 versus 588 ± 59 μm; p < 0.001), whereas the rebubbling rate was significantly higher in the DSEK group (47.6% versus 18.9%; p = 0.001). Finally, three grafts in the DSEK group experienced failure compared to one graft in the DSAEK group (14% versus 1.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Manually dissected and microkeratome‐dissected grafts performed similarly with respect to vision and endothelial cell loss assessed one year after surgery. The higher incidence of graft failure among manually dissected (i.e. DSEK) grafts may be attributable to reduced relative thickness compared to DSAEK grafts and/or the resulting differences in tissue handling and the surgeon's learning curve. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-02-25 2019-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6850414/ /pubmed/30803143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14074 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Muijzer, Marc B.
van Luijk, Chantal M.
van den Bogaerdt, Antoon J.
Kruit, Piet J.
Groeneveld‐van Beek, Esther
Melles, Gerrit R.J.
Wisse, Robert P.L.
Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title_full Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title_fullStr Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title_full_unstemmed Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title_short Prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
title_sort prospective evaluation of clinical outcomes between pre‐cut corneal grafts prepared using a manual or automated technique: with one‐year follow‐up
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6850414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30803143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14074
work_keys_str_mv AT muijzermarcb prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT vanluijkchantalm prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT vandenbogaerdtantoonj prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT kruitpietj prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT groeneveldvanbeekesther prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT mellesgerritrj prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup
AT wisserobertpl prospectiveevaluationofclinicaloutcomesbetweenprecutcornealgraftspreparedusingamanualorautomatedtechniquewithoneyearfollowup