Dataset Information

Retrospective contralateral study comparing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty with Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

In this retrospective study, the visual outcomes and postoperative complications after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in the fellow eye were compared. The patient's satisfaction was evaluated.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 10 patients, who underwent DSAEK in one eye and DMEK surgery in their fellow eye, was performed. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. Visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated, including higher-order aberrations (HOA) and contrast thresholds. A subjective questionnaire was used to evaluate patient satisfaction.

Results

Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was significantly better in DMEK when compared with DSAEK (0.16±0.10 vs 0.45±0.58 logMAR, P=0.043). Contrast threshold was significantly higher after DMEK than after DSAEK (0.49±0.23 vs 0.25±0.18, P=0.043). Post-keratoplasty astigmatism, mean spherical equivalent, and HOA did not differ. Nine out of ten patients preferred the DMEK procedure. Visual outcome (4.80±1.14 vs 4.50±1.58, P=0.257), surgery associated pain and burden (DMEK: 1.30±0.48 vs DSAEK: 1.30±0.48, P=1.0), estimated time for recovery and rehabilitation (27.6±54.0 vs 24.9±54.8 days, P=0.173), and mean patient satisfaction (5.40±0.84 vs 5.00±1.05, P=0.257) were evaluated equally.

Conclusion

Patient satisfaction reached high, equal values after DMEK and after DSAEK. Nevertheless, patients preferred DMEK, if given a choice. Reasons for the preference may include better uncorrected and BCVA, and especially a better contrast sensitivity.

SUBMITTER: Maier AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4366458 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Retrospective contralateral study comparing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty with Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Maier A-K B AK Gundlach E E Gonnermann J J Klamann M K J MK Bertelmann E E Rieck P W PW Joussen A M AM Torun N N

Eye (London, England) 20141121 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>In this retrospective study, the visual outcomes and postoperative complications after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in the fellow eye were compared. The patient's satisfaction was evaluated.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective analysis of 10 patients, who underwent DSAEK in one eye and DMEK surgery in their fellow eye, was performed. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. Visu ...[more]

PMID: 25412715

Similar Datasets

Project description:Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) is the most common corneal transplant procedure. A key step in the procedure is preparing the donor cornea for transplantation. This can be accomplished via 1 of 3 alternatives: surgeon cuts the cornea on the day of surgery, the cornea is precut ahead of time in an offsite facility by a trained technician, or a precut cornea is purchased from an eye bank. Currently, there is little evidence on the costs and effectiveness of these 3 strategies to allow healthcare providers decide upon the preferred method to prepare grafts.The aim of this study was to compare the costs and relative effectiveness of each strategy.The Singapore National Eye Centre and Singapore Eye Bank performed both precut cornea and surgeon-cut cornea transplant services between 2009 and 2013.This study included 110 subjects who received precut cornea and 140 who received surgeon-cut cornea. Clinical outcomes and surgical duration were compared across the strategies using the propensity score matching. The cost of each strategy was estimated using the microcosting and consisted of facility costs and procedural costs including surgical duration. One-way sensitivity analysis and threshold analysis were performed.The cost for DSAEK was highest for the surgeon-cut approach ($13,965 per procedure), followed by purchasing precut corneas ($12,659) and then setting up precutting ($12,421). The higher procedural cost of the surgeon-cut approach was largely due to the longer duration of the procedure (surgeon-cut?=?72.54?minutes, precut?=?59.45?minutes, P?<?0.001) and the higher surgeon fees. There was no evidence of differences in clinical outcomes between grafts that were precut or surgeon-cut. Threshold analysis demonstrated that if the number of cases was below 31 a year, the strategy that yielded the lowest cost was purchasing precut cornea from eye bank. If there were more than 290 cases annually, the cheapest option would be to setup precutting facility.Our findings suggest that it is more efficient for centers that are performing a large number of cornea transplants (more than 290 cases) to set up their own facility to conduct precutting.

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the topographic characteristics of the posterior corneal surface after Descemet's endothelial membrane keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and their effects on postoperative visual acuity.MethodsNineteen eyes of 19 patients after DMEK, 23 eyes of 23 patients after DSAEK, and 18 eyes of 18 control subjects were retrospectively analyzed. Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), aberration factors (higher-order aberrations [HOAs], spherical aberrations [SAs], and coma aberrations [Comas] at 6.0 mm) were evaluated preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. The posterior refractive pattern of the topography map was classified into 5 grades (0-5) (posterior color grade) using anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Correlations between BSCVA and some factors (abbreviation factors, posterior color grade) were analyzed.ResultsBSCVA was significantly better after DMEK than after DSAEK (P < 0.001). Posterior HOAs, SAs, and Comas after each type of endothelial keratoplasty were significantly greater compared to control (P < 0.01). Posterior HOAs, total/anterior/posterior SAs, and posterior color grade were significantly lower in the DMEK group than in the DSAEK group at 3 months (P < 0.024 [posterior HOAs], P = 0.047 [total SA], P < 0.001 [anterior SAs], P = 0.021 [posterior SAs], and P < 0.001 [posterior color grade]) and 6 months postoperatively (P = 0.034 [posterior HOAs], P < 0.001 [total SAs], P < 0.001 [anterior SAs], P = 0.013 [posterior SAs], and P = 0.004 [posterior color grade]). BSCVA was significantly correlated with HOAs, SAs, and posterior color grade (P < 0.001 for all except anterior HOAs [P = 0.004]).ConclusionsHigh posterior color grades were associated with larger aberration factors and had a negative effect on visual function after endothelial keratoplasty. Rapid improvement of visual function after DMEK may be attributed to less change at the posterior surface.

Dataset Information

Retrospective contralateral study comparing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty with Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Retrospective contralateral study comparing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty with Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets