Microkeratome versus manually dissected donor tissue for Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty: A randomized prospective study.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-11 DOI:10.4103/IJO.IJO_3282_23
Ritu Mali, Smruti R Priyadarshini, Srikant K Sahu, Amrita Mohanty, Sujata Das
{"title":"Microkeratome versus manually dissected donor tissue for Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty: A randomized prospective study.","authors":"Ritu Mali, Smruti R Priyadarshini, Srikant K Sahu, Amrita Mohanty, Sujata Das","doi":"10.4103/IJO.IJO_3282_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the visual outcomes, postoperative complications, and graft asymmetry between precut and manually dissected donor tissues for Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) procedures, respectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy eyes of 70 patients undergoing DSEK/DSAEK at a tertiary eyecare center in eastern India were included in this prospective randomized control study. The 70 eyes were divided equally into two groups. Group A ( n = 35) and Group B ( n = 35) underwent DSEK and DSAEK procedures, respectively. the operating surgeons prepared the manually dissected corneal grafts using lamellar dissectors. the eye bank technicians prepared the precut corneal grafts using a microkeratome. The patients were investigated postoperatively after 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The data were compared for visual outcomes [uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical and cylindrical refraction, and spherical equivalent], incidence of postoperative complications, and pachymetry.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age was 56.5 (±17.8) years, and the male-to-female ratio was 1.3:1. The most common indications were pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (45.71%, 32/70), failed graft (32.86%, 23/70), and Fuchs' endothelial corneal dystrophy (10%, 7/70). The indications for surgery ( P = 0.732) and donor ( P = 0.258) and host pachymetry ( P = 0.986) were comparable between both groups. There was no significant difference in change of UCVA, BCVA, and postoperative refraction (mean spherical refraction, P = 0.849; mean cylindrical refraction, P = 0.516; spherical equivalent, P = 0.518) between the two groups. Postoperative complications like graft detachment ( P = 0.179), graft failure ( P = 0.513), graft infiltrate ( P = 0.428), and endophthalmitis ( P = 0.493) were higher in the DSAEK group; however, the difference between the groups was insignificant. The graft asymmetry index was higher in DSAEK than in DSEK; the difference was significant till the 1-month follow-up ( P = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The outcome was similar in both groups. Therefore, manual donor dissection can be an alternative for microkeratome-assisted dissection in low-resource centers and countries to achieve good results.</p>","PeriodicalId":13329,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"1728-1733"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO_3282_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the visual outcomes, postoperative complications, and graft asymmetry between precut and manually dissected donor tissues for Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) procedures, respectively.

Methods: Seventy eyes of 70 patients undergoing DSEK/DSAEK at a tertiary eyecare center in eastern India were included in this prospective randomized control study. The 70 eyes were divided equally into two groups. Group A ( n = 35) and Group B ( n = 35) underwent DSEK and DSAEK procedures, respectively. the operating surgeons prepared the manually dissected corneal grafts using lamellar dissectors. the eye bank technicians prepared the precut corneal grafts using a microkeratome. The patients were investigated postoperatively after 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The data were compared for visual outcomes [uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical and cylindrical refraction, and spherical equivalent], incidence of postoperative complications, and pachymetry.

Results: The mean age was 56.5 (±17.8) years, and the male-to-female ratio was 1.3:1. The most common indications were pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (45.71%, 32/70), failed graft (32.86%, 23/70), and Fuchs' endothelial corneal dystrophy (10%, 7/70). The indications for surgery ( P = 0.732) and donor ( P = 0.258) and host pachymetry ( P = 0.986) were comparable between both groups. There was no significant difference in change of UCVA, BCVA, and postoperative refraction (mean spherical refraction, P = 0.849; mean cylindrical refraction, P = 0.516; spherical equivalent, P = 0.518) between the two groups. Postoperative complications like graft detachment ( P = 0.179), graft failure ( P = 0.513), graft infiltrate ( P = 0.428), and endophthalmitis ( P = 0.493) were higher in the DSAEK group; however, the difference between the groups was insignificant. The graft asymmetry index was higher in DSAEK than in DSEK; the difference was significant till the 1-month follow-up ( P = 0.005).

Conclusion: The outcome was similar in both groups. Therefore, manual donor dissection can be an alternative for microkeratome-assisted dissection in low-resource centers and countries to achieve good results.

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
微角膜切口与人工剥离供体组织用于 Descemet 剥脱内皮角膜成形术:随机前瞻性研究。
目的:比较预切供体组织和人工剥离供体组织分别用于Descemet剥离自动内皮角膜成形术(DSAEK)和Descemet剥离内皮角膜成形术(DSEK)的视觉效果、术后并发症和移植物不对称性:这项前瞻性随机对照研究纳入了在印度东部一家三级眼科中心接受 DSEK/DSAEK 手术的 70 名患者的 70 只眼睛。这 70 只眼睛被平均分成两组。A组(35 只)和B组(35 只)分别接受了 DSEK 和 DSAEK 手术。手术外科医生使用板层剥离器准备手动剥离的角膜移植物,眼库技术人员使用微型角膜刀准备预先切割的角膜移植物。患者分别在术后 1 天、1 周、1 个月、3 个月和 6 个月后接受检查。比较了视觉结果[未矫正视力(UCVA)、最佳矫正视力(BCVA)、球面和柱面屈光度、球面等值]、术后并发症发生率和角膜厚度等数据:平均年龄为 56.5 (±17.8) 岁,男女比例为 1.3:1。最常见的适应症是假性角膜牛皮癣(45.71%,32/70)、移植失败(32.86%,23/70)和福氏角膜内皮营养不良(10%,7/70)。两组的手术适应症(P = 0.732)、供体(P = 0.258)和宿主的角膜厚度(P = 0.986)具有可比性。两组 UCVA、BCVA 和术后屈光度(平均球面屈光度,P = 0.849;平均柱面屈光度,P = 0.516;球面等值,P = 0.518)的变化无明显差异。DSAEK 组的术后并发症较多,如移植物脱离(P = 0.179)、移植物失败(P = 0.513)、移植物浸润(P = 0.428)和眼底炎(P = 0.493),但组间差异不显著。DSAEK组的移植物不对称指数高于DSEK组;在1个月的随访中,差异显著(P = 0.005):结论:两组结果相似。因此,在资源匮乏的中心和国家,人工供体剥离可替代微角膜辅助剥离,以获得良好的效果。
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
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
19.40%
发文量
1963
审稿时长
38 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Ophthalmology covers clinical, experimental, basic science research and translational research studies related to medical, ethical and social issues in field of ophthalmology and vision science. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
期刊最新文献
A compressive assessment of patient satisfaction with ophthalmology with ophthalmology clinic services: A study at a tertiary care academic institution amidst and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Histopathological findings of anterior lens capsule in pediatric cataract. Primary eyecare in paediatrics population (PREPP) - II study: Study of satisfaction of services and barrier for not reporting to the base hospital on referral among pediatric patients treated in six major vision centers of a tertiary eye care facility in Southern India. Clinical, microbiologic, and treatment outcomes of dematiaceous fungal keratitis - A retrospective study. Effect of graded partial inferior rectus muscle tenotomy in treatment for superior oblique paralysis.
×
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