Endothelial keratoplasty – a review

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology - Tập 38 Số 2 - Trang 128-140 - 2010
Marianne O. Price1, Francis W. Price2
1Cornea Research Foundation of America, 9002 N. Meridian Street, Suite 212 Indianapolis, IN 46260, USA.
2Price Vision Group, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Tóm tắt

AbstractFrom its inception over a century ago, penetrating keratoplasty grew to become the most common and most successful form of solid tissue transplantation. Yet clinicians have long recognized the limitations of full‐thickness corneal transplants, including prolonged visual rehabilitation, unpredictable refractive changes, susceptibility to ocular surface complications and vulnerability to traumatic wound rupture. Selective replacement of diseased or damaged posterior corneal layers was conceptualized and implemented a half century ago. However, it has only been within the past decade that improved techniques and instrumentation have allowed endothelial keratoplasty (EK) to become the preferred treatment for patients with endothelial dysfunction. EK provides more rapid visual recovery, minimizes induced astigmatism and, most importantly, better maintains globe integrity than penetrating keratoplasty. Descemet stripping automated EK is currently the most widely used method. This article covers how EK techniques have evolved over time, considers who is or is not an appropriate candidate for EK, describes Descemet stripping automated EK methods and instrumentation, discusses EK postoperative complications and management and compares visual recovery, refractive outcomes and endothelial cell loss with that of standard penetrating keratoplasty.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1016/0002-9394(56)91269-7

Barraquer J, 1965, The Comea World Congress, 586

10.1097/ICU.0b013e3281a4775b

10.1097/01.ico.0000214224.90743.01

10.1097/01.ico.0000243962.60392.4f

Ko W, 1993, Experimental posterior lamellar transplantation of the rabbit cornea, Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 34, 1102

10.1097/00003226-199811000-00010

10.1097/00003226-200204000-00018

10.1097/00003226-200104000-00001

10.1097/00003226-200404000-00011

10.3928/1081-597X-20050701-07

10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.05.034

10.1097/01.ico.0000248385.16896.34

10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.07.010

10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.05.034

10.1097/ICO.0b013e318030d274

10.1097/01.ico.0000227888.03877.22

10.1097/ICO.0b013e31805fc38f

10.1016/j.ajo.2008.02.009

10.1016/j.ajo.2008.02.024

10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.12.030

10.1097/ICO.0b013e3180544902

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.004

10.1097/ICO.0b013e31817f38e9

10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.09.030

10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.11.045

10.1097/ICO.0b013e318182a4c1

10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.05.034

10.1001/archopht.126.10.1351

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.09.017

10.1097/ICO.0b013e318165841f

10.1097/ICO.0b013e318124a443

10.1001/archopht.126.8.1133

10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.06.050

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.009

10.1097/ICO.0b013e318182a4d3

Price MO, 2009, Effect of incision width on graft survival and endothelial cell loss after DSAEK, Cornea

10.1097/01.ico.0000243950.99472.f5

10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.10.052

10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.01.037

10.1016/j.ajo.2008.08.029

10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.12.078

10.3928/15428877-20081101-06

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.01.024

10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181611c50

10.1136/bjo.86.2.174

10.1001/archopht.1996.01100130013002

10.1016/S0161-6420(91)32136-5

WilliamsKA LoweMT BartlettCM KellyL CosterDJeds.The Australian Corneal Graft Registry 2007 Report.Adelaide Australia: Flinders University Press2007;141–3.

10.1001/archophthalmol.2008.619

10.1097/ICO.0b013e31802cd8c2

10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.09.005

10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.035

10.1016/j.ajo.2008.02.003

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.02.010

10.4103/0301-4738.41412

10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.06.021

10.1097/01.ico.0000232593.85224.46

10.1038/eye.2008.393

10.1016/j.ajo.2008.01.010

10.1136/bjo.2008.140020

10.1136/bjo.2008.140038

10.1097/ICO.0b013e31812f66e5

10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00463-9

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.01.004

10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.06.033

10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181814cbc

10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.017