Purpose <p>To investigate the clinical outcomes and immunologic implications following Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with prior glaucoma filtering surgery (GFS).</p> Study design <p>Retrospective comparative case series.</p> Methods <p>This study included 29 eyes with prior GFS that underwent DMEK (n=7) or DSAEK (n=22). Outcomes include host central corneal thickness (CCT), short-term complications (graft detachment, rebubbling, and primary graft failure [PGF]), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), immunologic graft rejection, endothelial cell loss (ECL), and graft survival.</p> Results <p>DMEK showed significantly faster recovery of host CCT compared to DSAEK on postoperative day 1 (573.2 ± 93.3 μm vs. 773.0 ± 40.7 μm; <i>p</i> = 0.02) and day 3 (591.1 ± 93.2 μm vs. 721.5 ± 108.9 μm; <i>p</i> = 0.003). Graft detachment rates were similar between the groups; rebubbling and PGF occurred only after DSAEK (14% and 9%). CDVA at 1 month (0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 1.0 ± 0.5) and at 3 months (0.4 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.4) was significantly better in the DMEK group (both <i>p</i> = 0.04). The 2-year cumulative rejection rates (14% in both groups), 2-year ECL (70 ± 17% vs. 71 ± 15%), and 2-year graft survival rate (100% vs. 81 ± 10%) were comparable.</p> Conclusions <p>DMEK appears to be a viable option after GFS, given its favorable clinical profile. However, the relatively high incidence of immunologic events in both groups suggests that alterations in the ocular immune environment following GFS may influence postoperative outcomes.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty versus descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty following glaucoma filtering surgery: clinical outcomes and immunologic considerations

  • Hirotsugu Kasamatsu,
  • Shizuka Koh,
  • Yukari Yagi-Yaguchi,
  • Daisuke Tomida,
  • Takefumi Yamaguchi

摘要

Purpose

To investigate the clinical outcomes and immunologic implications following Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with prior glaucoma filtering surgery (GFS).

Study design

Retrospective comparative case series.

Methods

This study included 29 eyes with prior GFS that underwent DMEK (n=7) or DSAEK (n=22). Outcomes include host central corneal thickness (CCT), short-term complications (graft detachment, rebubbling, and primary graft failure [PGF]), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), immunologic graft rejection, endothelial cell loss (ECL), and graft survival.

Results

DMEK showed significantly faster recovery of host CCT compared to DSAEK on postoperative day 1 (573.2 ± 93.3 μm vs. 773.0 ± 40.7 μm; p = 0.02) and day 3 (591.1 ± 93.2 μm vs. 721.5 ± 108.9 μm; p = 0.003). Graft detachment rates were similar between the groups; rebubbling and PGF occurred only after DSAEK (14% and 9%). CDVA at 1 month (0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 1.0 ± 0.5) and at 3 months (0.4 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.4) was significantly better in the DMEK group (both p = 0.04). The 2-year cumulative rejection rates (14% in both groups), 2-year ECL (70 ± 17% vs. 71 ± 15%), and 2-year graft survival rate (100% vs. 81 ± 10%) were comparable.

Conclusions

DMEK appears to be a viable option after GFS, given its favorable clinical profile. However, the relatively high incidence of immunologic events in both groups suggests that alterations in the ocular immune environment following GFS may influence postoperative outcomes.