Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rescuing Failed Penetrating Keratoplasty Grafts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Modern Keratoplasty

Part of the book series: Essentials in Ophthalmology ((ESSENTIALS))

  • 127 Accesses

Abstract

Corneal transplantation is the most commonly performed human tissue transplantation procedure worldwide. Because of the large number of transplants, corneal graft failure has become one of the most common indications for corneal transplantation. The relatively recently developed lamellar transplant techniques have brought about specific potential complications leading to graft failure that may require different approaches to repeat transplantation other than penetrating keratoplasty (PK). On the other hand, these new lamellar techniques also provide novel ways of rescuing failed penetrating grafts, with potential advantages over successive PKs, such as reduced intraoperative risks and faster visual rehabilitation. In the current chapter, we will summarize the incidence and risk factors of graft failure for penetrating corneal transplants and discuss the various surgical alternatives currently available to rescue such failed grafts, with a focus on the reported outcomes and limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gain P, Jullienne R, He Z, Aldossary M, Acquart S, Cognasse F, et al. Global survey of corneal transplantation and eye banking. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(2):167–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alió JMA, El Sayyad F, Barraquer R, Arnalich-Montiel F, Alió del Barrio JL. Corneal graft failure: an update. Br J Ophthalmol. 2020;105(8):1049–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Patel SV. Graft survival after penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151(3):397–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Alino AM, Perry HD, Kanellopoulos AJ, Donnenfeld ED, Rahn EK. Conjunctival flaps. Ophthalmology. 1998;105(6):1120–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Qazi Y, Hamrah P. Corneal allograft rejection: immunopathogenesis to therapeutics. J Clin Cell Immunol. 2013;2013(9):6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kharod-Dholakia B, Randleman JB, Bromley JG, Stulting RD. Prevention and treatment of corneal graft rejection: current practice patterns of the Cornea Society (2011). Cornea. 2015;34(6):609–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hudde T, Minassian DC, Larkin DF. Randomised controlled trial of corticosteroid regimens in endothelial corneal allograft rejection. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83(12):1348–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Yamazoe K, Yamazoe K, Shimazaki-Den S, Shimazaki J. Prognostic factors for corneal graft recovery after severe corneal graft rejection following penetrating keratoplasty. BMC Ophthalmol. 2013;13:5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Pasari A, Price MO, Feng MT, Price FW Jr. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for failed penetrating keratoplasty: visual outcomes and graft survival. Cornea. 2018;38(2):151–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Borderie VM, Boëlle PY, Touzeau O, Allouch C, Boutboul S, Laroche L. Predicted long-term outcome of corneal transplantation. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(12):2354–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fukuoka S, Honda N, Ono K, Mimura T, Usui T, Amano S. Extended long-term results of penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus. Cornea. 2010;29(5):528–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mannis MJ, Holland EJ, Gal RL, Dontchev M, Kollman C, Raghinaru D, et al. The effect of donor age on penetrating keratoplasty for endothelial disease: graft survival after 10 years in the cornea donor study. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(12):2419–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tan DTH, Janardhanan P, Zhou H, Chan YH, Htoon HM, Ang LPK, et al. Penetrating keratoplasty in asian eyes. The Singapore Corneal Transplant Study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(6):975–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Thompson RW, Price MO, Bowers PJ, Price FW. Long-term graft survival after penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(7):1396–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Williams KA, Lowe M, Bartlett C, Kelly T-L, Coster DJ. Risk factors for human corneal graft failure within the Australian Corneal Graft Registry. Transplantation. 2008;86(12):1720–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Matthaei M, Sandhaeger H, Hermel M, Adler W, Jun AS, Cursiefen C, et al. Changing indications in penetrating keratoplasty: a systematic review of 34 years of global reporting. Transplantation. 2017;101(6):1387–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Williams KA, Coffey NE, et al. The Australian corneal graft registry 2018 report. Adelaide: Flinders University; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Barraquer RI, Pareja-Aricò L, Gómez-Benlloch A, Michael R. Risk factors for graft failure after penetrating keratoplasty. Medicine. 2019;98(17):e15274.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Williams KA, Esterman AJ, Bartlett C, Holland H, Hornsby NB, Coster DJ. How effective is penetrating corneal transplantation? Factors influencing long-term outcome in multivariate analysis. Transplantation. 2006;81(6):896–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ang M, Mehta JS, Sng CC, Htoon HM, Tan DT. Indications, outcomes, and risk factors for failure in tectonic keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(7):1311–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Perera C, Jhanji V, Lamoureux E, Pollock G, Favilla I, Vajpayee RB. Clinical presentation, risk factors and treatment outcomes of first allograft rejection after penetrating keratoplasty in early and late postoperative period. Eye. 2012;26(5):711–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Price MO, Thompson RW Jr, Price FW Jr. Risk factors for various causes of failure in initial corneal grafts. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121(8):1087–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sugar A, Gal RL, Kollman C, Raghinaru D, Dontchev M, Croasdale CR, et al. Factors associated with corneal graft survival in the cornea donor study. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(3):246–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Sugar A, Tanner JP, Dontchev M, Tennant B, Schultze RL, Dunn SP, et al. Recipient risk factors for graft failure in the cornea donor study. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(6):1023–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson SE, Kaufman HE. Graft failure after penetrating keratoplasty. Surv Ophthalmol. 1990;34(5):325–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Park CY, Lee JK, Gore PK, Lim CY, Chuck RS. Keratoplasty in the United States: a 10-year review from 2005 through 2014. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(12):2432–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. America EBAo. The 2019 EBAA statistical report: highlights, trends in eye banking and corneal transplantation. 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Maguire MG, Stark WJ, Gottsch JD, Stulting RD, Sugar A, Fink NE, et al. Risk factors for corneal graft failure and rejection in the collaborative corneal transplantation studies. Collaborative Corneal Transplantation Studies Research Group. Ophthalmology. 1994;101(9):1536–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hos D, Le VNH, Hellmich M, Siebelmann S, Roters S, Bachmann BO, et al. Risk of corneal graft rejection after high-risk keratoplasty following fine-needle vessel coagulation of corneal neovascularization combined with bevacizumab: a pilot study. Transplant Direct. 2019;5(5):e452.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Ang M, Baskaran M, Werkmeister RM, Chua J, Schmidl D, Aranha Dos Santos V, et al. Anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018;66:132–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Abudou M, Wu T, Evans JR, Chen X. Immunosuppressants for the prophylaxis of corneal graft rejection after penetrating keratoplasty. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;8:CD007603.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kim HK, Choi JA, Uehara H, Zhang X, Ambati BK, Cho YK. Presurgical corticosteroid treatment improves corneal transplant survival in mice. Cornea. 2013;32(12):1591–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Koay PY, Lee WH, Figueiredo FC. Opinions on risk factors and management of corneal graft rejection in the United kingdom. Cornea. 2005;24(3):292–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Birnbaum F, Mayweg S, Reis A, Bohringer D, Seitz B, Engelmann K, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) following penetrating high-risk keratoplasty: long-term results of a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Eye. 2009;23(11):2063–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sinha R, Jhanji V, Verma K, Sharma N, Biswas NR, Vajpayee RB. Efficacy of topical cyclosporine A 2% in prevention of graft rejection in high-risk keratoplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010;248(8):1167–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Böhringer D, Grotejohann B, Ihorst G, Reinshagen H, Spierings E, Reinhard T. Rejection prophylaxis in corneal transplant. Dtsch Arzteblatt Int. 2018;115(15):259–65.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hopkinson CL, Romano V, Kaye RA, Steger B, Stewart RM, Tsagkataki M, et al. The influence of donor and recipient gender incompatibility on corneal transplant rejection and failure. Am J Transplant. 2017;17(1):210–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hager JL, Phillips DL, Goins KM, Kitzmann AS, Greiner MA, Cohen AW, et al. Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis for failed keratoplasty. Int Ophthalmol. 2016;36(1):73–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ahmad S, Mathews PM, Lindsley K, Alkharashi M, Hwang FS, Ng SM, et al. Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis versus repeat donor keratoplasty for corneal graft failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(1):165–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fadous R, Levallois-Gignac S, Vaillancourt L, Robert MC, Harissi-Dagher M. The Boston keratoprosthesis type 1 as primary penetrating corneal procedure. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(12):1664–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramamurthy S, Reddy JC, Vaddavalli PK, Ali MH, Garg P. Outcomes of repeat keratoplasty for failed therapeutic keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;162(83-8):e2.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Srujana D, Kaur M, Urkude J, Rathi A, Sharma N, Titiyal JS. Long-term functional and anatomic outcomes of repeat graft after optically failed therapeutic keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2018;189:166–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Abdelkader A. Changes in corneal wound healing and graft biomechanics after primary penetrating keratoplasty versus repeat penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2019;38(8):1006–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Raber IM, Arentsen JJ, Laibson PR. Traumatic wound dehiscence after penetrating keratoplasty. Arch Ophthalmol. 1980;98(8):1407–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Binder PS, Abel R Jr, Polack FM, Kaufman HE. Keratoplasty wound separations. Am J Ophthalmol. 1975;80(1):109–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pettinelli DJ, Starr CE, Stark WJ. Late traumatic corneal wound dehiscence after penetrating keratoplasty. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(6):853–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kirkness CM, Ezra E, Rice NS, Steele AD. The success and survival of repeat corneal grafts. Eye. 1990;4(1):58–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Seitz B, Langenbucher A, Kuchle M, Naumann GO. Impact of graft diameter on corneal power and the regularity of postkeratoplasty astigmatism before and after suture removal. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(11):2162–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bessant DA, Dart JK. Lamellar keratoplasty in the management of inflammatory corneal ulceration and perforation. Eye. 1994;8(1):22–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Jones DH, Kirkness CM. A new surgical technique for keratoglobus-tectonic lamellar keratoplasty followed by secondary penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2001;20(8):885–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Lee RM, Lam FC, Georgiou T, Paul B, Then KY, Mavrikakis I, et al. Suturing techniques and postoperative management in penetrating keratoplasty in the United Kingdom. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:1335–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Koenig SB, Harris GJ. Temporary suture tarsorrhaphy after penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 1991;10(2):121–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Aboshiha J, Jones MNA, Hopkinson CL, Larkin DFP. Differential survival of penetrating and lamellar transplants in management of failed corneal grafts. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018;136(8):859–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Al-Mezaine H, Wagoner MD. Repeat penetrating keratoplasty: indications, graft survival, and visual outcome. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(3):324–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Kitazawa K, Wakimasu K, Kayukawa K, Yokota I, Inatomi T, Hieda O, et al. Moderately long-term safety and efficacy of repeat penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2018;37(10):255–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Weisbrod DJ, Sit M, Naor J, Slomovic AR. Outcomes of repeat penetrating keratoplasty and risk factors for graft failure. Cornea. 2003;22(5):429–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Jabbehdari S, Rafii AB, Yazdanpanah G, Hamrah P, Holland EJ, Djalilian AR. Update on the management of high-risk penetrating keratoplasty. Curr Ophthalmol Rep. 2017;5(1):38–48.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Beckingsale P, Mavrikakis I, Al-Yousuf N, Mavrikakis E, Daya SM. Penetrating keratoplasty: outcomes from a corneal unit compared to national data. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(6):728–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Bersudsky V, Blum-Hareuveni T, Rehany U, Rumelt S. The profile of repeated corneal transplantation. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(3):461–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Keane MC, Galettis RA, Mills RAD, Coster DJ, Williams KA. A comparison of endothelial and penetrating keratoplasty outcomes following failed penetrating keratoplasty: a registry study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(11):1569–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kitzmann AS, Wandling GR, Sutphin JE, Goins KM, Wagoner MD. Comparison of outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty versus Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty for penetrating keratoplasty graft failure due to corneal edema. Int Ophthalmol. 2012;32(1):15–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Patel NP, Kim T, Rapuano CJ, Cohen EJ, Laibson PR. Indications for and outcomes of repeat penetrating keratoplasty, 1989-1995. Ophthalmology. 2000;107(4):719–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Rapuano CJ, Cohen EJ, Brady SE, Arentsen JJ, Laibson PR. Indications for and outcomes of repeat penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1990;109(6):689–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Yalniz-Akkaya Z, Nurozler AB, Yildiz EH, Onat M, Budak K, Duman S. Repeat penetrating keratoplasty: indications and prognosis, 1995-2005. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2009;19(3):362–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Barut Selver O, Karaca I, Palamar M, Egrilmez S, Yagci A. Graft failure and repeat penetrating keratoplasty. Exp Clin Transplant. 2018;19(1):72–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wang F, Zhang T, Kang YW, He JL, Li SM, Li SW. Endothelial keratoplasty versus repeat penetrating keratoplasty after failed penetrating keratoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(7):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Lee WB, Jacobs DS, Musch DC, Kaufman SC, Reinhart WJ, Shtein RM. Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty: safety and outcomes: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(9):1818–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Ang M, Htoon HM, Cajucom-Uy HY, Tan D, Mehta JS. Donor and surgical risk factors for primary graft failure following Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in Asian eyes. Clin Ophthalmol. 2011;5:1503–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Ang M, Mehta JS, Anshu A, Wong HK, Htoon HM, Tan D. Endothelial cell counts after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:537–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Ang M, Mehta JS, Lim F, Bose S, Htoon HM, Tan D. Endothelial cell loss and graft survival after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(11):2239–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Ang M, Soh Y, Htoon HM, Mehta JS, Tan D. Five-year graft survival comparing descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2016;123(8):1646–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Ezon I, Shih CY, Rosen LM, Suthar T, Udell IJ. Immunologic graft rejection in descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty for endothelial disease. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(7):1360–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW Jr. Risk of corneal transplant rejection significantly reduced with Descemet’s membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(3):536–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Straiko MD, Terry MA, Shamie N. Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty under failed penetrating keratoplasty: a surgical strategy to minimize complications. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151(2):233–7 e2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Clements JL, Bouchard CS, Lee WB, Dunn SP, Mannis MJ, Reidy JJ, et al. Retrospective review of graft dislocation rate associated with descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty after primary failed penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2011;30(4):414–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Al-Mezaine H, Wagoner MD, King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital Cornea Transplant Study G. Repeat penetrating keratoplasty: indications, graft survival, and visual outcome. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(3):324–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Williams KA, Roder D, Esterman A, Muehlberg SM, Coster DJ. Factors predictive of corneal graft survival. Report from the Australian Corneal Graft Registry. Ophthalmology. 1992;99(3):403–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Ang M, Ho H, Wong C, Htoon HM, Mehta JS, Tan D. Endothelial keratoplasty after failed penetrating keratoplasty: an alternative to repeat penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158(6):1221–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Ang M, Lim F, Htoon HM, Tan D, Mehta JS. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity following Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(3):307–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Fuest M, Ang M, Htoon HM, Tan D, Mehta JS. Long-term visual outcomes comparing descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;182:62–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Bose S, Ang M, Mehta JS, Tan DT, Finkelstein E. Cost-effectiveness of Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(3):464–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW Jr. Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty under failed penetrating keratoplasty: visual rehabilitation and graft survival rate. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(11):2155–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Covert DJ, Koenig SB. Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with failed penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2007;26(6):692–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Heitor de Paula F, Kamyar R, Shtein RM, Sugar A, Mian SI. Endothelial keratoplasty without Descemet stripping after failed penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2012;31(6):645–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Nottage JM, Nirankari VS. Endothelial keratoplasty without Descemet’s stripping in eyes with previous penetrating corneal transplants. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(1):24–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Anshu A, Lim LS, Htoon HM, Tan DT. Postoperative risk factors influencing corneal graft survival in the Singapore Corneal Transplant Study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151(3):442–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Fuest M, Siregar SR, Farrag A, Htoon HM, Tan D, Mehta JS. Long-term follow-up of deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;256(9):1669–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Price FW Jr, Price MO. Endothelial keratoplasty to restore clarity to a failed penetrating graft. Cornea. 2006;25(8):895–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Mitry D, Bhogal M, Patel AK, Lee BS, Chai SM, Price MO, et al. Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty after failed penetrating keratoplasty: survival, rejection risk, and visual outcome. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132(6):742–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Einan-Lifshitz A, Mednick Z, Belkin A, Sorkin N, Alshaker S, Boutin T, et al. Comparison of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty in the treatment of failed penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2019;38(9):1077–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW Jr. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and hybrid techniques for managing failed penetrating grafts. Cornea. 2013;32(1):1–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Heinzelmann S, Bohringer D, Eberwein P, Lapp T, Reinhard T, Maier P. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for graft failure following penetrating keratoplasty. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017;255(5):979–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Pasari A, Price MO, Feng MT, Price FW Jr. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for failed penetrating keratoplasty: visual outcomes and graft survival. Cornea. 2019;38(2):151–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Pierne K, Panthier C, Courtin R, Mazharian A, Souedan V, Gatinel D, et al. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty after failed penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea. 2019;38(3):280–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Schrittenlocher S, Schlereth SL, Siebelmann S, Hayashi T, Matthaei M, Bachmann B, et al. Long-term outcome of descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) following failed penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Acta Ophthalmol. 2020;98(7):e901–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Sorkin N, Mimouni M, Santaella G, Trinh T, Cohen E, Einan-Lifshitz A, et al. Comparison of manual and femtosecond laser-assisted descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for failed penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 2020;214:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Alio Del Barrio JL, Montesel A, Ho V, Bhogal M. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty under failed penetrating keratoplasty without host descemetorhexis for the management of secondary graft failure. Cornea. 2020;39(1):13–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Güell JL, Morral M, Barbany M, Gris O, Elies D, Manero F. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty after penetrating keratoplasty. J EuCornea. 2019;2:10–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Lavy I, Liarakos VS, Verdijk RM, Parker J, Muller TM, Bruinsma M, et al. Outcome and histopathology of secondary penetrating keratoplasty graft failure managed by descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2017;36(7):777–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Sorkin N, Trinh T, Einan-Lifshitz A, Mednick Z, Santaella G, Telli A, et al. Outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for failed penetrating keratoplasty. Can J Ophthalmol. 2019;54(6):741–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Steindor FA, Clemens AC, Herwig-Carl MC, et al. Wound healing of descemet membrane after penetrating keratoplasty and its relevance for descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty surgeons. Cornea. 2021;40(7):910–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vissum Miranza, Miguel Hernández University, Alicante, Spain

    Jorge L. Alió del Barrio & Jorge L. Alió

  2. Cornea Unit, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK

    Scott Robbie

  3. Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore

    Marcus Ang

  4. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, Singapore

    Marcus Ang

  5. Cornea, Cataract and Refractive Surgery Unit, Vissum (Miranza Group), Alicante, Spain

    Andrea Montesel

  6. Jules Gonin Eye Hospital, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Andrea Montesel

Authors
  1. Jorge L. Alió del Barrio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott Robbie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marcus Ang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrea Montesel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jorge L. Alió
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Vissum Miranza, Miguel Hernández University, Alicante, Spain

    Jorge L. Alió

  2. Vissum-Instituto Oftalmologico de Alica, Miguel Hernandez University, Alicante, Alicante, Spain

    Jorge L. Alió del Barrio

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

del Barrio, J.L.A., Robbie, S., Ang, M., Montesel, A., Alió, J.L. (2023). Rescuing Failed Penetrating Keratoplasty Grafts. In: Alió, J.L., del Barrio, J.L.A. (eds) Modern Keratoplasty. Essentials in Ophthalmology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32408-6_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32408-6_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32407-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32408-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation