Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty in pseudophakic bullous keratopathy: comparison of visual outcomes, graft survival rates, and complications

Ayşe Tüfekçi Balıkçı, Nurşah Demir, A. Burcu, Züleyha Yalnız Akkaya, E. Şingar, S. Uzman
{"title":"Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty in pseudophakic bullous keratopathy: comparison of visual outcomes, graft survival rates, and complications","authors":"Ayşe Tüfekçi Balıkçı, Nurşah Demir, A. Burcu, Züleyha Yalnız Akkaya, E. Şingar, S. Uzman","doi":"10.18621/eurj.1449647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the outcomes of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) and Penetrating Keratoplasty (PK) in patients with pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). \nMethods: Records of 51 eyes of 51 PBK patients (32 male, 19 female) who underwent PK (Group1=38 eyes) and DMEK (Group 2=13 eyes) were reviewed retrospectively. The two groups were compared for Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), graft survival rates, and complications. \nResults: The mean age was 69.1 and 67.1 years in group 1 and group 2, respectively. First-year cumulative survival rates for group 1 and group 2 were 92.1% and 61.5%, respectively, and 89.1% and 51.3% in the second year (P=0.001 by log-rank test). At the last follow-up visit, 2.7% of Group 1 and 30.8% of Group 2 had a BCVA of 0.3 or better (P=0.004). Graft failure was observed in 12 eyes (31.6%) in group 1 and 8 eyes (61.5%) in group 2 (P=0.056). At the last examination, the rates of transparent grafts were 73.7% and 69.2% in group 1 and group 2, respectively (P=0.756). Postoperative glaucoma was observed in 4 eyes (30.8%) in the group 2 and 4 eyes (10.5%) in the group 1 (P=0.083). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding other complications (P>0.05). \nConclusions: DMEK surgery offers a better visual outcome than PK for the treatment of PBK. Careful follow-up of patients is required in terms of glaucoma and graft failure after DMEK. Although the graft survival rate was lower in the DMEK group, a similar rate of graft transparency was achieved at the final examination with repeated DMEK surgery.","PeriodicalId":22571,"journal":{"name":"The European Research Journal","volume":"18 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18621/eurj.1449647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the outcomes of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) and Penetrating Keratoplasty (PK) in patients with pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). Methods: Records of 51 eyes of 51 PBK patients (32 male, 19 female) who underwent PK (Group1=38 eyes) and DMEK (Group 2=13 eyes) were reviewed retrospectively. The two groups were compared for Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), graft survival rates, and complications. Results: The mean age was 69.1 and 67.1 years in group 1 and group 2, respectively. First-year cumulative survival rates for group 1 and group 2 were 92.1% and 61.5%, respectively, and 89.1% and 51.3% in the second year (P=0.001 by log-rank test). At the last follow-up visit, 2.7% of Group 1 and 30.8% of Group 2 had a BCVA of 0.3 or better (P=0.004). Graft failure was observed in 12 eyes (31.6%) in group 1 and 8 eyes (61.5%) in group 2 (P=0.056). At the last examination, the rates of transparent grafts were 73.7% and 69.2% in group 1 and group 2, respectively (P=0.756). Postoperative glaucoma was observed in 4 eyes (30.8%) in the group 2 and 4 eyes (10.5%) in the group 1 (P=0.083). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding other complications (P>0.05). Conclusions: DMEK surgery offers a better visual outcome than PK for the treatment of PBK. Careful follow-up of patients is required in terms of glaucoma and graft failure after DMEK. Although the graft survival rate was lower in the DMEK group, a similar rate of graft transparency was achieved at the final examination with repeated DMEK surgery.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
假性角膜大疱性角膜病中的去角质膜内皮角膜移植术和穿透性角膜移植术:视觉效果、移植物存活率和并发症的比较
目的比较假性角膜牛皮样角膜病(PBK)患者接受 Descemet 膜内皮角膜移植术(DMEK)和穿透性角膜移植术(PK)的疗效。方法:回顾性审查了 51 名 PBK 患者(32 名男性,19 名女性)的 51 眼记录,他们分别接受了 PK(第一组=38 眼)和 DMEK(第二组=13 眼)手术。比较两组患者的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)、移植物存活率和并发症。结果:第一组和第二组的平均年龄分别为 69.1 岁和 67.1 岁。第一组和第二组的第一年累积存活率分别为 92.1%和 61.5%,第二年分别为 89.1%和 51.3%(经对数秩检验,P=0.001)。在最后一次随访中,2.7%的第一组患者和30.8%的第二组患者的BCVA达到或超过0.3(P=0.004)。第一组中有 12 只眼睛(31.6%)和第二组中有 8 只眼睛(61.5%)出现移植失败(P=0.056)。在最后一次检查中,第一组和第二组的移植物透明率分别为 73.7% 和 69.2%(P=0.756)。第二组有 4 只眼睛(30.8%)观察到术后青光眼,第一组有 4 只眼睛(10.5%)观察到术后青光眼(P=0.083)。两组在其他并发症方面无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论与 PK 相比,DMEK 手术治疗 PBK 的视觉效果更好。DMEK手术后需要对患者的青光眼和移植物失败情况进行仔细随访。虽然 DMEK 组的移植物存活率较低,但重复 DMEK 手术的最终检查结果显示,移植物的透明度相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty in pseudophakic bullous keratopathy: comparison of visual outcomes, graft survival rates, and complications Eisenmenger syndrome presenting with chronic thromboembolic disease Exploring menopausal dynamics: a cross-sectional analysis of age, symptomatology, and sociodemographic influences in a developing population of women aged 40-60 Rheumatology nurses’ knowledge and practices on pain management Relationship between fortilin levels and coronary ischemia in heart failure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1