Advertisement

Cell and Tissue Banking

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 95–108 | Cite as

Epithelial analysis of simple limbal epithelial transplantation in limbal stem cell deficiency by in vivo confocal microscopy and impression cytology

  • Pinnita Prabhasawat
  • Angkoon Luangaram
  • Pattama Ekpo
  • Kaevalin Lekhanont
  • Wimolwan Tangpagasit
  • Chawikan Boonwong
  • Naharuthai Inthasin
  • Chareenun ChirapapaisanEmail author
Article
  • 102 Downloads

Abstract

Simple limbal epithelial transplantation (SLET) is a relatively new treatment for severe limbal stem cell deficiency. Outcomes of treatment are typically determined based on clinical manifestations. In this prospective-multicenter study, we aimed to analyze the epithelial phenotypes of the corneas after SLET using IVCM and IC, and correlated them with clinical findings. Ten eyes of nine patients, who underwent SLET (five autologous SLET and five living-related SLET) were recruited. A set of examinations included slit-lamp biomicroscopy, corneal in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), and impression cytology (IC) was performed in all eyes at least twice (≥ 3-month interval) postoperatively. Then, a correlation between findings of the three examinations was analyzed. There were seven eyes with clinical success (no central neovascularization) showed pure corneal epithelial phenotype or mixed corneal-conjunctival phenotypes (mostly cornea) in either IVCM or IC. Three eyes with clinical failure, presented with peripheral and central neovascularization, showed total or predominant conjunctival phenotype in IVCM and sole conjunctival phenotype in IC. From a total of 22 sets of examinations, there was a high correlation between clinical manifestation vs. IC (κ = 0.844, observed agreement = 81.82%) and a substantial correlation between clinical manifestation vs. IVCM (κ = 0.727, observed agreement = 76.19%) and between IVCM versus IC (κ = 0.729, observed agreement = 76.19%). In conclusion, IVCM and IC facilitate determination of epithelial phenotype of the cornea after SLET. There was a substantial to high correlation between IVCM, IC and clinical presentations. Findings observed by IVCM and IC may allow early detection of epithelial alterations in eyes underwent SLET before clinical recognition.

Keywords

Limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) In vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) Impression cytology (IC) Cornea Epithelial phenotype 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge contributors from Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University: Wiwit Tantibhedhyangkul, Ph.D and Patimaporn Wongprompitak, Ph.D (Department of Immunology) for encouragement and valuable comments; Anupong Veeraburinon (Research Division) for assistance with manuscript development and data collection; Pratuangsri Chonpimai (Department of Ophthalmology) for assistance with in vivo confocal microscopy; Mathuwan Srikong and Kritphol Rattanawarinchai (Medical Education Technology Centre) for preparing the figures; and Nuttawat Saenyasiri, MD (Department of Immunology) for providing technical support of immunofluorescence imaging. Furthermore, we would like to acknowledge all patients for their kind cooperation and engagement throughout the study.

Funding

This work was supported by Research Development Fund from Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University (Grant Number R015932015). The funder was not involved in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; or the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Ethical approval

Ethical review boards from Siriraj Hospital, Ramathibodi Hospital, and Thammasat University Hospital have been approved this study before enrolling the cases (Approval Number, Si051/2016: Siriraj Hospital; 2559/255: Ramathibodi Hospital; and 047/2559: Thammasat University Hospital).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects recruited in this study.

Supplementary material

10561_2018_9746_MOESM1_ESM.tif (137.9 mb)
Supplemental Figure 1: Preoperative and postoperative slit lamp images of all eyes underwent SLET (TIFF 141203 kb)
10561_2018_9746_MOESM2_ESM.tif (7.4 mb)
Supplemental Figure 2: Positive and negative controls of immunofluorescence staining (TIFF 7570 kb)
10561_2018_9746_MOESM3_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 18 kb)

References

  1. Amescua G, Atallah M, Nikpoor N, Galor A, Perez VL (2014) Modified simple limbal epithelial transplantation using cryopreserved amniotic membrane for unilateral limbal stem cell deficiency. Am J Ophthalmol 158:469–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baradaran-Rafii A, Eslani M, Djalillian AR (2013) Complications of keratolimbal allograft surgery. Cornea 32:561–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basu S, Sureka SP, Shanbhag SS, Kethiri AR, Singh V, Sangwan VS (2016) Simple limbal epithelial transplantation: long-term clinical outcomes in 125 cases of unilateral chronic ocular surface burns. Ophthalmology 123:1000–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calonge M, Diebold Y, Saez V, Enriquez de Salamanca A, Garcia-Vazquez C, Corrales RM, Herreras JM (2004) Impression cytology of the ocular surface: a review. Exp Eye Res 78:457–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dua HS, Saini JS, Azuara-Blanco A, Gupta P (2000) Limbal stem cell deficiency: concept, aetiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis and management. Indian J Ophthalmol 48:83–92Google Scholar
  6. Eckard A, Stave J, Guthoff RF (2006) In vivo investigations of the corneal epithelium with the confocal Rostock Laser Scanning Microscope (RLSM). Cornea 25:127–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guthoff RF, Zhivov A, Stachs O (2009) In vivo confocal microscopy, an inner vision of the cornea—a major review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 37:100–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holland EJ (2015) Management of limbal stem cell deficiency: a historical perspective, past, present, and future. Cornea 34(Suppl 10):S9–S15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Iyer G, Srinivasan B, Agarwal S, Tarigopula A (2017) Outcome of allo simple limbal epithelial transplantation (alloSLET) in the early stage of ocular chemical injury. Br J Ophthalmol 101:828–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jester JV, Ho-Chang J (2003) Modulation of cultured corneal keratocyte phenotype by growth factors/cytokines control in vitro contractility and extracellular matrix contraction. Exp Eye Res 77:581–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jirsova K, Dudakova L, Kalasova S, Vesela V, Merjava S (2011) The OV-TL 12/30 clone of anti-cytokeratin 7 antibody as a new marker of corneal conjunctivalization in patients with limbal stem cell deficiency. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:5892–5898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kasper M, Moll R, Stosiek P, Karsten U (1988) Patterns of cytokeratin and vimentin expression in the human eye. Histochemistry 89:369–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kenyon KR, Tseng SC (1989) Limbal autograft transplantation for ocular surface disorders. Ophthalmology 96:709–722 discussion 722-703 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kinoshita S, Kiorpes TC, Friend J, Thoft RA (1983) Goblet cell density in ocular surface disease. A better indicator than tear mucin. Arch Ophthalmol 101:1284–1287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mastropasqua L, Calienno R, Lanzini M, Nubile M, Colabelli-Gisoldi RA, De Carlo L, Pocobelli A (2016) In vivo confocal microscopy of the sclerocorneal limbus after limbal stem cell transplantation: looking for limbal architecture modifications and cytological phenotype correlations. Mol Vis 22:748–760Google Scholar
  17. Messmer EM, Mackert MJ, Zapp DM, Kampik A (2006) In vivo confocal microscopy of normal conjunctiva and conjunctivitis. Cornea 25:781–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nelson JD, Wright JC (1984) Conjunctival goblet cell densities in ocular surface disease. Arch Ophthalmol 102:1049–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ohji M, Ohmi G, Kiritoshi A, Kinoshita S (1987) Goblet cell density in thermal and chemical injuries. Arch Ophthalmol 105:1686–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pedrotti E, Passilongo M, Fasolo A, Nubile M, Parisi G, Mastropasqua R, Ficial S, Bertolin M, Di Iorio E, Ponzin D, Marchini G (2015) In vivo confocal microscopy 1 year after autologous cultured limbal stem cell grafts. Ophthalmology 122:1660–1668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pellegrini G, Traverso CE, Franzi AT, Zingirian M, Cancedda R, De Luca M (1997) Long-term restoration of damaged corneal surfaces with autologous cultivated corneal epithelium. Lancet 349:990–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Prabhasawat P, Ekpo P, Uiprasertkul M, Chotikavanich S, Tesavibul N, Pornpanich K, Luemsamran P (2016) Long-term result of autologous cultivated oral mucosal epithelial transplantation for severe ocular surface disease. Cell Tissue Bank 17:491–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rivas L, Oroza MA, Perez-Esteban A, Murube-del-Castillo J (1992) Morphological changes in ocular surface in dry eyes and other disorders by impression cytology. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 230:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sacchetti M, Lambiase A, Cortes M, Sgrulletta R, Bonini S, Merlo D, Bonini S (2005) Clinical and cytological findings in limbal stem cell deficiency. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:870–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sangwan VS, Basu S, MacNeil S, Balasubramanian D (2012) Simple limbal epithelial transplantation (SLET): a novel surgical technique for the treatment of unilateral limbal stem cell deficiency. Br J Ophthalmol 96:931–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shortt AJ, Bunce C, Levis HJ, Blows P, Doré CJ, Vernon A, Secker GA, Tuft SJ, Daniels JT (2014) Three-year outcomes of cultured limbal epithelial allografts in aniridia and Stevens-Johnson syndrome evaluated using the Clinical Outcome Assessment in Surgical Trials assessment tool. Stem Cells Transl Med 3:265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tseng SC (1989) Concept and application of limbal stem cells. Eye (Lond) 3(Pt 2):141–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vazirani J, Ali MH, Sharma N, Gupta N, Mittal V, Atallah M, Amescua G, Chowdhury T, Abdala-Figuerola A, Ramirez-Miranda A, Navas A, Graue-Hernández EO, Chodosh J (2016) Autologous simple limbal epithelial transplantation for unilateral limbal stem cell deficiency: multicentre results. Br J Ophthalmol 100:1416–1420CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pinnita Prabhasawat
    • 1
  • Angkoon Luangaram
    • 1
  • Pattama Ekpo
    • 2
  • Kaevalin Lekhanont
    • 3
  • Wimolwan Tangpagasit
    • 4
  • Chawikan Boonwong
    • 5
  • Naharuthai Inthasin
    • 2
  • Chareenun Chirapapaisan
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj HospitalMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.Department of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj HospitalMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  3. 3.Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi HospitalMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  4. 4.Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of MedicineThammasat UniversityPathumthaniThailand
  5. 5.Research Division, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj HospitalMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations