Advertisement

Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens

  • Konstantinos Droutsas
  • Apostolos Lazaridis
  • George Kymionis
  • Klio Chatzistefanou
  • Dimitris Papaconstantinou
  • Walter Sekundo
  • Chryssanthi Koutsandrea
Original Paper
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To describe the outcomes of endothelial keratoplasty (EK) for bullous keratopathy in eyes with a retained angle-supported anterior chamber intraocular lens (acIOL).

Methods

Among 263 consecutive EK procedures, 7 DMEK and 11 DSAEK procedures were identified in eyes with an acIOL and included in the present retrospective case series. Pre- and postoperative status including ocular history, anatomical outcome and complications as well as best-corrected visual acuity was evaluated.

Results

Ocular history included complicated cataract surgery (n = 11), ocular trauma (n = 4) and primary intracapsular cataract extraction (n = 3). Surgery-related complications included primary graft failure (n = 1), graft detachment (n = 1), endophthalmitis (n = 1) and allograft rejection (n = 1). A clear cornea at the final examination (14 ± 4 months) was observed in 14/18 (78%), while the visual outcome was limited due to significant ocular comorbidity in 9 out of 14 uncomplicated procedures.

Conclusion

The presented short-term outcomes suggest that both DMEK and DSAEK are feasible in eyes with an angle-supported acIOL yielding an acceptable graft survival rate in the first postoperative year.

Keywords

Endothelial keratoplasty DMEK DSAEK Anterior chamber intraocular lens Graft survival 

Notes

Authors’ contribution

KD designed and conducted the study. KD, AL, KC and GK analyzed the results and prepared the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Dick HB, Augustin AJ (2001) Lens implant selection with absence of capsular support. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 12:47–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kohnen T, Hengerer FH (2014) Anterior chamber intraocular lenses for aphakia correction. Ophthalmologe 111:310–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergman M, Laatikainen L (1994) Cystoid macular oedema after complicated cataract surgery and implantation of an anterior chamber lens. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 72:178–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu GJ, Okisaka S, Mizukawa A, Momose A (1993) Histopathological study of pseudophakic bullous keratopathy developing after anterior chamber of iris-supported intraocular lens implantation. Jpn J Ophthalmol 37:414–425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sawada T, Kimura W, Kimura T, Suga H, Ohte A, Yamanishi S, Ohara T (1998) Long-term follow-up of primary anterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 24:1515–1520CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dapena I, Moutsouris K, Droutsas K, Ham L, van Dijk K, Melles GR (2011) Standardized “no-touch” technique for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Arch Ophthalmol 129:88–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dapena I, Ham L, Droutsas K, van Dijk K, Moutsouris K, Melles GR (2011) Learning curve in Descemet’s membrane endothelial keratoplasty: first series of 135 consecutive cases. Ophthalmology 118:2147–2154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen ES, Terry MA, Shamie N, Hoar KL, Friend DJ (2008) Descemet-stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: six-month results in a prospective study of 100 eyes. Cornea 27:514–520CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aralikatti A, Dean S, Busin M, Shah S (2008) Pull-through technique for graft insertion in DSAEK. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:341–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhu L, Zha Y, Cai J, Zhang Y (2017) Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: a meta-analysis. Int Ophthalmol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0533-3 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Droutsas K, Lazaridis A, Papaconstantinou D, Brouzas D, Moschos MM, Schulze S, Sekundo W (2016) Visual outcomes after descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty versus descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty—comparison of specific matched pairs. Cornea 35:765–771CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamzaoglu EC, Straiko MD, Mayko ZM, Sáles CS, Terry MA (2015) The first 100 eyes of standardized Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus standardized Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Ophthalmology 122:2193–2199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Park CY, Lee JK, Gore PK, Lim CY, Chuck RS (2015) Keratoplasty in the United States: a 10-year review from 2005 through 2014. Ophthalmology 122:2432–2442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elderkin S, Tu E, Sugar J, Reddy S, Kadakia A, Ramaswamy R, Djalilian A (2010) Outcome of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in patients with an anterior chamber intraocular lens. Cornea 29:1273–1277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ang M, Li L, Chua D, Wong C, Htoon HM, Mehta JS, Tan D (2014) Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with anterior chamber intraocular lenses: complications and 3-year outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol 98:1028–1032CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shpitzer SA, Rosenblatt A, Bahar I (2014) Outcomes of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in patients with an anterior chamber versus posterior chamber intraocular lens. Cornea 33:686–690CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tannan A, Vo RC, Chen JL, Yu F, Deng SX, Aldave AJ (2015) Comparison of ACIOL retention with IOL exchange in patients undergoing Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 34:1030–1034CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lie JT, Birbal R, Ham L, van der Wees J, Melles GR (2008) Donor tissue preparation for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1578–1583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ham L, Dapena I, Liarakos VS, Baydoun L, van Dijk K, Ilyas A, Oellerich S, Melles GR (2016) Midterm results of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: 4–7 years clinical outcome. Am J Ophthalmol 171:113–121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liarakos VS, Ham L, Dapena I, Tong CM, Quilendrino R, Yeh RY, Melles GR (2013) Endothelial keratoplasty for bullous keratopathy in eyes with an anterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1835–1845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Esquenazi S, Esquenazi K (2010) Endothelial cell survival after Descemet stripping with automated endothelial keratoplasty with retained anterior chamber intraocular lens. Cornea 29:1368–1372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Anshu A, PriceMO Price FW Jr (2012) Risk of corneal transplant rejection significantly reduced with Descemet’s membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Ophthalmology 119:536–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ampazas P, Droutsas K, Giallouros E, Schroeder FM, Sekundo W (2017) Comparison of 5% sulfur hexafluoride versus 100% air tamponade in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 36:1189–1194PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wylegała E, Tarnawska D (2008) Management of pseudophakic bullous keratopathy by combined Descemet-stripping endothelial keratoplasty and intraocular lens exchange. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1708–1714CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Terry MA, Shamie N, Chen ES, Phillips PM, Shah AK, Hoar KL, Friend DJ (2009) Endothelial keratoplasty for Fuchs’ dystrophy with cataract: complications and clinical results with the new triple procedure. Ophthalmology 116:631–639CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hsu M, Jorgensen AJ, Moshirfar M, Mifflin MD (2013) Management and outcomes of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with intraocular lens exchange, aphakia, and anterior chamber intraocular lens. Cornea 32:e64–e68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weller JM, Tourtas T, Kruse FE (2015) Feasibility and outcome of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty in complex anterior segment and vitreous disease. Cornea 34:1351–1357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shah AK, Terry MA, Shamie N, Chen ES, Phillips PM, Hoar KL, Friend DJ, Davis-Boozer D (2010) Complications and clinical outcomes of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with intraocular lens exchange. Am J Ophthalmol 149(3):390–397.e1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Konstantinos Droutsas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Apostolos Lazaridis
    • 1
    • 2
  • George Kymionis
    • 1
    • 3
  • Klio Chatzistefanou
    • 1
  • Dimitris Papaconstantinou
    • 1
  • Walter Sekundo
    • 2
  • Chryssanthi Koutsandrea
    • 1
  1. 1.First Department of OphthalmologyNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of OphthalmologyPhilipps UniversityMarburgGermany
  3. 3.Jules Gonin Eye Hospital, Faculty of Biology and MedicineUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations