Cargando…

Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison

BACKGROUND: To compare the visual outcome and patients’ satisfaction after ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) performed on fellow eyes of the same patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the records...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mencucci, Rita, Favuzza, Eleonora, Marziali, Elisa, Cennamo, Michela, Mazzotta, Cosimo, Lucenteforte, Ersilia, Virgili, Gianni, Rizzo, Stanislao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7201595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32391399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-020-00191-6
_version_ 1783529567003082752
author Mencucci, Rita
Favuzza, Eleonora
Marziali, Elisa
Cennamo, Michela
Mazzotta, Cosimo
Lucenteforte, Ersilia
Virgili, Gianni
Rizzo, Stanislao
author_facet Mencucci, Rita
Favuzza, Eleonora
Marziali, Elisa
Cennamo, Michela
Mazzotta, Cosimo
Lucenteforte, Ersilia
Virgili, Gianni
Rizzo, Stanislao
author_sort Mencucci, Rita
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To compare the visual outcome and patients’ satisfaction after ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) performed on fellow eyes of the same patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the records of 18 pseudophakic patients affected by Fuchs endothelial dystrophy who underwent DMEK in one eye and UT-DSAEK in the fellow eye were reviewed. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal pachymetry, keratometry, corneal aberrations, photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity, and endothelial cell counts measured 12 months after surgery in either eye were analyzed and compared. The results of a satisfaction questionnaire were also reviewed. RESULTS: Twelve months after surgery, BCVA was not significantly different in UT-DSAEK and DMEK eyes (0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.07 ± 0.07 logMAR, respectively); at both 4- and 6 mm optical zones total and posterior corneal higher order aberrations (HOAs), posterior astigmatism and total coma were significantly lower after DMEK; BCVA in both groups was significantly correlated mainly with anterior corneal aberrations; contrast sensitivity was higher after DMEK especially in mesopic conditions and at medium spatial frequencies; the endothelial cell density was similar, although slightly higher in the UT-DSAEK group (p = 0.10). The satisfaction questionnaire showed that although patients were highly satisfied from both procedures, more than half of them preferred DMEK and reported a more comfortable and quicker postoperative recovery. CONCLUSIONS: DMEK and UT-DSAEK showed no evidence of difference in terms of postoperative BCVA, although DMEK had a better performance in terms of contrast sensitivity, posterior corneal aberrations and overall patient satisfaction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7201595
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72015952020-05-08 Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison Mencucci, Rita Favuzza, Eleonora Marziali, Elisa Cennamo, Michela Mazzotta, Cosimo Lucenteforte, Ersilia Virgili, Gianni Rizzo, Stanislao Eye Vis (Lond) Research BACKGROUND: To compare the visual outcome and patients’ satisfaction after ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) performed on fellow eyes of the same patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the records of 18 pseudophakic patients affected by Fuchs endothelial dystrophy who underwent DMEK in one eye and UT-DSAEK in the fellow eye were reviewed. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal pachymetry, keratometry, corneal aberrations, photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity, and endothelial cell counts measured 12 months after surgery in either eye were analyzed and compared. The results of a satisfaction questionnaire were also reviewed. RESULTS: Twelve months after surgery, BCVA was not significantly different in UT-DSAEK and DMEK eyes (0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.07 ± 0.07 logMAR, respectively); at both 4- and 6 mm optical zones total and posterior corneal higher order aberrations (HOAs), posterior astigmatism and total coma were significantly lower after DMEK; BCVA in both groups was significantly correlated mainly with anterior corneal aberrations; contrast sensitivity was higher after DMEK especially in mesopic conditions and at medium spatial frequencies; the endothelial cell density was similar, although slightly higher in the UT-DSAEK group (p = 0.10). The satisfaction questionnaire showed that although patients were highly satisfied from both procedures, more than half of them preferred DMEK and reported a more comfortable and quicker postoperative recovery. CONCLUSIONS: DMEK and UT-DSAEK showed no evidence of difference in terms of postoperative BCVA, although DMEK had a better performance in terms of contrast sensitivity, posterior corneal aberrations and overall patient satisfaction. BioMed Central 2020-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7201595/ /pubmed/32391399 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-020-00191-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mencucci, Rita
Favuzza, Eleonora
Marziali, Elisa
Cennamo, Michela
Mazzotta, Cosimo
Lucenteforte, Ersilia
Virgili, Gianni
Rizzo, Stanislao
Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title_full Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title_fullStr Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title_full_unstemmed Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title_short Ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
title_sort ultrathin descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a fellow-eye comparison
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7201595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32391399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-020-00191-6
work_keys_str_mv AT mencuccirita ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT favuzzaeleonora ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT marzialielisa ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT cennamomichela ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT mazzottacosimo ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT lucenteforteersilia ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT virgiligianni ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison
AT rizzostanislao ultrathindescemetstrippingautomatedendothelialkeratoplastyversusdescemetmembraneendothelialkeratoplastyafelloweyecomparison