Cargando…
Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate
AIM: To investigate the difference in adhesion and rebubbling rate between eye bank and surgeon prepared Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) tissues. METHODS: Laboratory and clinical retrospective comparative interventional case series. Research corneal tissues were obtained for labora...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8788033/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33127828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317608 |
_version_ | 1784639472221028352 |
---|---|
author | Romano, Vito Kazaili, Ahmed Pagano, Luca Gadhvi, Kunal Ajit Titley, Mitchell Steger, Bernhard Fernández-Vega-Cueto, Luis Meana, Alvaro Merayo-Lloves, Jesus Diego, Ponzin Akhtar, Riaz Levis, Hannah J Ferrari, Stefano Kaye, Stephen B Parekh, Mohit |
author_facet | Romano, Vito Kazaili, Ahmed Pagano, Luca Gadhvi, Kunal Ajit Titley, Mitchell Steger, Bernhard Fernández-Vega-Cueto, Luis Meana, Alvaro Merayo-Lloves, Jesus Diego, Ponzin Akhtar, Riaz Levis, Hannah J Ferrari, Stefano Kaye, Stephen B Parekh, Mohit |
author_sort | Romano, Vito |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To investigate the difference in adhesion and rebubbling rate between eye bank and surgeon prepared Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) tissues. METHODS: Laboratory and clinical retrospective comparative interventional case series. Research corneal tissues were obtained for laboratory investigation. The clinical study involved patients with endothelial dysfunction who underwent DMEK surgery and tamponade with air. Tissues were stripped using a standard DMEK stripping technique (SCUBA) and shipped as prestripped or loaded in a 2.2 intra-ocular lens cartridge with endothelium facing inwards (preloaded) before transporting from the eye bank to the surgeon. For surgeon prepared tissues, all the grafts were stripped in the theatre and transplanted or stripped in the laboratory and tested immediately. Adhesion force and elastic modulus were measured in the centre and mid-periphery in a laboratory ex vivo investigation using atomic force microscopy, while rebubbling rates were recorded in the clinical study. RESULTS: There was no difference in endothelial cell viability between surgeon or eye bank prepared tissue. Surgeon-stripped DMEK grafts in the laboratory investigation showed significantly higher elastic modulus and adhesion force compared to prestripped and preloaded tissues (p<0.0001). In the clinical data, rebubbling rates of 48%, 40% and 15% were observed in preloaded, prestripped and surgeon-stripped DMEK grafts, respectively. Rebubbling rates were significantly associated with combined cataract surgery (p=0.009) and with time from harvesting the graft to the surgery (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased adhesion forces and elastic modulus in eye bank prepared tissues may contribute to increased rebubbling rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8788033 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87880332022-02-07 Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate Romano, Vito Kazaili, Ahmed Pagano, Luca Gadhvi, Kunal Ajit Titley, Mitchell Steger, Bernhard Fernández-Vega-Cueto, Luis Meana, Alvaro Merayo-Lloves, Jesus Diego, Ponzin Akhtar, Riaz Levis, Hannah J Ferrari, Stefano Kaye, Stephen B Parekh, Mohit Br J Ophthalmol Clinical Science AIM: To investigate the difference in adhesion and rebubbling rate between eye bank and surgeon prepared Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) tissues. METHODS: Laboratory and clinical retrospective comparative interventional case series. Research corneal tissues were obtained for laboratory investigation. The clinical study involved patients with endothelial dysfunction who underwent DMEK surgery and tamponade with air. Tissues were stripped using a standard DMEK stripping technique (SCUBA) and shipped as prestripped or loaded in a 2.2 intra-ocular lens cartridge with endothelium facing inwards (preloaded) before transporting from the eye bank to the surgeon. For surgeon prepared tissues, all the grafts were stripped in the theatre and transplanted or stripped in the laboratory and tested immediately. Adhesion force and elastic modulus were measured in the centre and mid-periphery in a laboratory ex vivo investigation using atomic force microscopy, while rebubbling rates were recorded in the clinical study. RESULTS: There was no difference in endothelial cell viability between surgeon or eye bank prepared tissue. Surgeon-stripped DMEK grafts in the laboratory investigation showed significantly higher elastic modulus and adhesion force compared to prestripped and preloaded tissues (p<0.0001). In the clinical data, rebubbling rates of 48%, 40% and 15% were observed in preloaded, prestripped and surgeon-stripped DMEK grafts, respectively. Rebubbling rates were significantly associated with combined cataract surgery (p=0.009) and with time from harvesting the graft to the surgery (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased adhesion forces and elastic modulus in eye bank prepared tissues may contribute to increased rebubbling rates. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-02 2020-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8788033/ /pubmed/33127828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317608 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Science Romano, Vito Kazaili, Ahmed Pagano, Luca Gadhvi, Kunal Ajit Titley, Mitchell Steger, Bernhard Fernández-Vega-Cueto, Luis Meana, Alvaro Merayo-Lloves, Jesus Diego, Ponzin Akhtar, Riaz Levis, Hannah J Ferrari, Stefano Kaye, Stephen B Parekh, Mohit Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title | Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title_full | Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title_fullStr | Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title_full_unstemmed | Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title_short | Eye bank versus surgeon prepared DMEK tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
title_sort | eye bank versus surgeon prepared dmek tissues: influence on adhesion and re-bubbling rate |
topic | Clinical Science |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8788033/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33127828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317608 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT romanovito eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT kazailiahmed eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT paganoluca eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT gadhvikunalajit eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT titleymitchell eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT stegerbernhard eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT fernandezvegacuetoluis eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT meanaalvaro eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT merayollovesjesus eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT diegoponzin eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT akhtarriaz eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT levishannahj eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT ferraristefano eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT kayestephenb eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate AT parekhmohit eyebankversussurgeonprepareddmektissuesinfluenceonadhesionandrebubblingrate |