Cargando…
Is ultra-thin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty a viable alternative to Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Ultra-thin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) is a recently developed surgical procedure that has shown promising results for the management of various corneal endothelial diseases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of the UT-DSAEK to the Descemet membran...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9909050/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36776476 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/25158414221147823 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Ultra-thin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) is a recently developed surgical procedure that has shown promising results for the management of various corneal endothelial diseases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of the UT-DSAEK to the Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). DESIGN: A systematic analysis of the studies comparing UT-DSAEK with DMEK by evaluating one or more outcomes (vision, complications, and post-operative endothelial cell counts) was performed. The meta-analysis was done if two or more studies reported a common outcome. METHODS: We used PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases to identify articles comparing the outcomes of UT-DSAEK with DMEK and performed a meta-analysis using RevMan, version 5.4. RESULTS: A total of six studies were included in this review (two randomized clinical trials and four non-randomized comparative studies). Our analysis showed the patients who underwent DMEK cases showed better visual outcomes with a mean difference of 0.06 LogMAR (95% CI: 0.04–0.09) in BCVA, albeit with i(2) of 52% (heterogenous values). The evidence was weak, with the most weightage on retrospective studies. UT-DSAEK showed significantly fewer complications such as graft dislocations, with an odds ratio of 0.25 (95% CI: 0.13–0.48). There was no significant difference in the endothelial cell counts with a mean difference of 86.34 (95%CI: –133.09 to –305.77). CONCLUSION: Although the literature is limited on UT-DSAEK with post-operative visual acuity that could be practically at par with DMEK, lesser complication rates and comparable post-operative endothelial cells could be a suitable alternative to DMEK for corneal endothelial pathologies. |
---|