Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Keratoprosthesis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Current Advances in Ocular Surgery

Part of the book series: Current Practices in Ophthalmology ((CUPROP))

  • 236 Accesses

Abstract

Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis is the most commonly used keratoprosthesis worldwide. Visual and retention outcomes of Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis have significantly improved due to advancements in design and postoperative care. Preoperative patient selection is integral to successful outcomes. Preoperative or concurrent glaucoma surgery should be considered in the presence of glaucoma. Regular lifelong follow-up with measures to prevent infections, maintenance of epithelial integrity, and glaucoma management are critical for optimal outcomes. Continued advances in design and measures to enhance biointegration are likely to improve the outcomes of of keratoprosthesis implantation.

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. Khan BF, Harissi-Dagher M, Khan DM, Dohlman CHJIoc. Advances in Boston keratoprosthesis: enhancing retention and prevention of infection and inflammation. Int Opthalmol Clin. 2007;47(2):61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aldave AJ, Kamal KM, Vo RC, Yu F. The Boston type I keratoprosthesis: improving outcomes and expanding indications. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(4):640–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Srikumaran D, Munoz B, Aldave AJ, Aquavella JV, Hannush SB, Schultze R, et al. Long-term outcomes of Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation: a retrospective multicenter cohort. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2159–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chirila TV, Hicks CR. The origins of the artificial cornea: Pellier de Quengsy and his contribution to the modern concept of keratoprosthesis. Gesnerus. 1999;56(1–2):96–106.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Salvador-Culla B, Kolovou PE. Keratoprosthesis: a review of recent advances in the field. J Funct Biomater. 2016;7(2):13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Falcinelli G, Falsini B, Taloni M, Colliardo P, Falcinelli G. Modified osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis for treatment of corneal blindness: long-term anatomical and functional outcomes in 181 cases. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(10):1319–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ma X, Xiang R, Meng X, Qin L, Wu Y, Tain L, et al. Russian keratoprosthesis in Stevens–Johnson syndrome. Cornea. 2017;36(3):304–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gonzalez-Andrades M, Sharifi R, Islam MM, Divoux T, Haist M, Paschalis EI, et al. Improving the practicality and safety of artificial corneas: pre-assembly and gamma-rays sterilization of the Boston Keratoprosthesis. Ocul Surf. 2018;16(3):322–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dohlman CH, Schneider HA, Doane MG. Prosthokeratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1974;77(5):694–700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dohlman CH, Harissi-Dagher M, Graney J. The Boston keratoprosthesis: a new threadless design. Digit J Ophthalmol. 2007;13(3):1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Saeed HN, Shanbhag S, Chodosh J. The Boston keratoprosthesis. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2017;28(4):390–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bakshi SK, Paschalis EI, Graney J, Chodosh J. Lucia and beyond: development of an affordable keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2019;38(4):492–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bakshi SK, Graney J, Paschalis EI, Agarwal S, Basu S, Iyer G, et al. Design and outcomes of a novel keratoprosthesis: addressing unmet needs in end-stage cicatricial corneal blindness. Cornea. 2020;39(4):484–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Yaghouti F, Nouri M, Abad JC, Power WJ, Doane MG, Dohlman CH. Keratoprosthesis: preoperative prognostic categories. Cornea. 2001;20(1):19–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keivyon KR, Tseng SC. Limbal autograft transplantation for ocular surface disorders. Ophthalmology. 1989;96(5):709–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sangwan VS, Basu S, MacNeil S, Balasubramanian D. Simple limbal epithelial transplantation (SLET): a novel surgical technique for the treatment of unilateral limbal stem cell deficiency. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(7):931–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Liang L, Sheha H, Li J, Tseng S. Limbal stem cell transplantation: new progresses and challenges. Eye. 2009;23(10):1946–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sejpal K, Yu F, Aldave AJ. The Boston keratoprosthesis in the management of corneal limbal stem cell deficiency. Cornea. 2011;30(11):1187–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Aravena C, Bozkurt TK, Yu F, Aldave AJ. Long-term outcomes of the Boston type I keratoprosthesis in the management of corneal limbal stem cell deficiency. Cornea. 2016;35(9):1156–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Meier-Kriesche H-U, Ojo A, Hanson J, Cibrik D, Lake K, Agodoa LY, et al. Increased immunosuppressive vulnerability in elderly renal transplant Recipients1, 2. Transplantation. 2000;69(5):885–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chang H-YP, Luo ZK, Chodosh J, Dohlman CH, Colby KA. Primary implantation of type I Boston keratoprosthesis in nonautoimmune corneal diseases. Cornea. 2015;34(3):264–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fadous R, Levallois-Gignac S, Vaillancourt L, Robert M-C, 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 

  23. Driver TH, Aravena C, Duong HN, Christenbury JG, Yu F, Basak SK, et al. Outcomes of the Boston type I keratoprosthesis as the primary penetrating corneal procedure. Cornea. 2018;37(11):1400–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Utine CA, Gehlbach PL, Zimmer-Galler I, Akpek EK. Permanent keratoprosthesis combined with pars plana vitrectomy and silicone oil injection for visual rehabilitation of chronic hypotony and corneal opacity. Cornea. 2010;29(12):1401–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chan CC, Holland EJ, Sawyer WI, Neff KD, Petersen MR, Riemann CD. Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis combined with silicone oil for treatment of hypotony in prephthisical eyes. Cornea. 2011;30(10):1105–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Noorily SW, Foulks GN, McCuen BW. Results of penetrating keratoplasty associated with silicone oil retinal tamponade. Ophthalmology. 1991;98(8):1186–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Birch EE, Cheng C, Stager DR Jr, Weakley DR Jr, Stager DR Sr. The critical period for surgical treatment of dense congenital bilateral cataracts. J AAPOS. 2009;13(1):67–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Huang C, O'Hara M, Mannis MJ. Primary pediatric keratoplasty: indications and outcomes. Cornea. 2009;28(9):1003–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Aquavella JV, Gearinger MD, Akpek EK, McCormick GJ. Pediatric keratoprosthesis. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(5):989–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nallasamy S, Colby K. Keratoprosthesis: procedure of choice for corneal opacities in children? Semin Ophthalmol. 2010;25(5-6):244–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fung SS, Jabbour S, Harissi-Dagher M, Tan RR, Hamel P, Baig K, et al. Visual outcomes and complications of type I Boston keratoprosthesis in children: a retrospective multicenter study and literature review. Ophthalmology. 2018;125(2):153–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pineles SL, Ela-Dalman N, Rosenbaum AL, Aldave AJ, Velez FG. Binocular visual function in patients with Boston type I keratoprostheses. Cornea. 2010;29(12):1397–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sayegh RR, Diaz LA, Vargas-Martín F, Webb RH, Dohlman CH, Peli E. Optical functional properties of the Boston Keratoprosthesis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51(2):857–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Le Q, Xu J, Deng SX. The diagnosis of limbal stem cell deficiency. Ocul Surf. 2018;16(1):58–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Talajic JC, Agoumi Y, Gagné S, Moussally K. Harissi-y progression, and impact of glaucoma on vision after Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(2):267–74. e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lenis TL, Chiu SY, Law SK, Yu F, Aldave AJ. Safety of concurrent Boston type I keratoprosthesis and glaucoma drainage device implantation. Ophthalmology. 2017;124(1):12–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Zerbe BL, Belin MW, Ciolino JB, Group BTKS. Results from the multicenter Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis study. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(10):1779–84. e1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Banitt M. Evaluation and management of glaucoma after keratoprosthesis. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2011;22(2):133–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Cade F, Grosskreutz CL, Tauber A, Dohlman CH. Glaucoma in eyes with severe chemical burn, before and after keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2011;30(12):1322–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sayegh RR, Ang LP, Foster CS, Dohlman CH. The Boston keratoprosthesis in Stevens-Johnson syndrome. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145(3):438–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Nguyen P, Chopra V. Glaucoma management in Boston keratoprosthesis type I recipients. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25(2):134–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Farias CC, Ozturk HE, Albini TA, Berrocal AM, Amescua G, Betancurt C, et al. Use of intraocular videoendoscopic examination in the preoperative evaluation of keratoprosthesis surgery to assess visual potential. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158(1):80–6. e2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Silva LD, Santos A, Hirai F, Allemann N, Berezovsky A, Salomão SR, et al. B-scan ultrasound, visual electrophysiology and perioperative videoendoscopy for predicting functional results in keratoprosthesis candidates. Br J Ophthalmol. 2022;106(1):32–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Robert M-C, Biernacki K, Harissi-Dagher M. Boston keratoprosthesis type 1 surgery: use of frozen versus fresh corneal donor carriers. Cornea. 2012;31(4):339–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Akpek EK, Aldave AJ, Aquavella JV. The use of precut, γ-irradiated corneal lenticules in Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;154(3):495–8. e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ament JD, Tilahun Y, Mudawi E, Pineda R. Role for ipsilateral autologous corneas as a carrier for the Boston keratoprosthesis: the Africa experience. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128(6):795–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Khalifa YM, Moshirfar M. Improved centration of the type 1 Boston Keratoprosthesis in donor carrier tissue. Clin Ophthalmol. 2010;4:931.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Recommendations Boston KPro Follow-up: Boston, MA: Harvard Medical School; 2015. https://eye.hms.harvard.edu/eyeinsights/2015-september/recommendations-for-boston-kpro-follow-up.

  49. Durand ML, Dohlman CH. Successful prevention of bacterial endophthalmitis in eyes with the Boston keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2009;28(8):896–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ramchandran RS, DiLoreto DA Jr, Chung MM, Kleinman DM, Plotnik RP, Graman P, et al. Infectious endophthalmitis in adult eyes receiving Boston type I keratoprosthesis. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(4):674–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Chan CC, Holland EJ. Infectious keratitis after Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation. Cornea. 2012;31(10):1128–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kim MJ, Yu F, Aldave AJ. Microbial keratitis after Boston type I keratoprosthesis implantation: incidence, organisms, risk factors, and outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(11):2209–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ghaffari R, Bonnet C, Yung M, Bostan C, Harissi-Dagher M, Aldave AJ. Infectious keratitis after Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation. Cornea. 2021;40(10):1298–308.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wagoner MD, Welder JD, Goins KM, Greiner MA. Microbial keratitis and endophthalmitis after the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2016;35(4):486–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Prabhasawat P, Chotikavanich S, Ngowyutagon P, Pinitpuwadol W. Long-term outcomes of Boston type I Keratoprosthesis, and efficacy of amphotericin B and povidone-iodine in infection prophylaxis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2021;232:40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Pelletier J, Barone S, Capriotii J. Keratoprosthesis prophylaxis: is it time for a paradigm shift? Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:1785.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Odorcic S, Haas W, Gilmore MS, Dohlman CH. Fungal infections following Boston type 1 Keratoprosthesis implantation: literature review and in vitro antifungal activity of Hypochlorous acid. Cornea. 2015;34(12):1599.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Speaker MG, Menikoff JA. Prophylaxis of endophthalmitis with topical povidone-iodine. Ophthalmology. 1991;98(12):1769–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hoekstra MJ, Westgate SJ, Mueller S. Povidone-iodine ointment demonstrates in vitro efficacy against biofilm formation. Int Wound J. 2017;14(1):172–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Magalhães FP, do Nascimento HM, Ecker DJ, Sannes-Lowery KA, Sampath R, Rosenblatt MI, et al. Microbiota evaluation of patients with a Boston type I keratoprosthesis treated with topical 0.5% moxifloxacin and 5% povidone–iodine. Cornea. 2013;32(4):407–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Harissi-Dagher M, Beyer J, Dohlman CH. The role of soft contact lenses as an adjunct to the Boston keratoprosthesis. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2008;48(2):43–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Thomas M, Shorter E, Joslin CE, McMahon TJ, Cortina MS. Contact lens use in patients with Boston keratoprosthesis type 1: fitting, management, and complications. Eye Contact Lens. 2015;41(6):334–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Keratoprosthesis patient management: mass eye and ear. https://masseyeandear.org/medical-professionals/keratoprosthesis.

  64. Patel S, Takusagawa H, Shen L, Dohlman C, Grosskreutz C. Long-term complications associated with glaucoma drainage devices and Boston keratoprosthesis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;154(1):207–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Li JY, Greiner MA, Brandt JD, Lim MC, Mannis MJ. Long-term complications associated with glaucoma drainage devices and Boston keratoprosthesis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;152(2):209–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kammerdiener LL, Speiser JL, Aquavella JV, Harissi-Dagher M, Dohlman CH, Chodosh J, et al. Protective effect of soft contact lenses after Boston keratoprosthesis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(4):549–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Liu J, Harissi-Dagher M. Comparison of outcomes in patients with and without soft contact lens wear following Boston keratoprosthesis type 1. Can J Ophthalmol. 2022;57(3):154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kapamajian MA, de la Cruz J, Hallak JA, Vajaranant TS. Correlation between corneal and scleral pneumatonometry: an alternative method for intraocular pressure measurement. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;156(5):902–6. e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Kuo DS, Ou Y, Jeng BH, Bhisitkul R, Stewart JM, Duncan JL, et al. Correlation of serial scleral and corneal pneumatonometry. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(9):1771–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sayegh RR, Dohlman CH. Wide-angle fundus imaging through the Boston keratoprosthesis. Retina. 2013;33(6):1188–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Geoffrion D, Hassanaly SI, Marchand M, Daoud R, Agoumi Y, Harissi-Dagher M. Assessment of the role and timing of glaucoma surgery in Boston Keratoprosthesis type 1 patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 2021;226:56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Enders P, Hall J, Bornhauser M, Mansouri K, Altay L, Schrader S, et al. Telemetric intraocular pressure monitoring after Boston keratoprosthesis surgery using the Eyemate-IO sensor: dynamics in the first year. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019;206:256–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Choritz L, Mansouri K, van den Bosch J, Weigel M, Dick HB, Wagner M, et al. Telemetric measurement of intraocular pressure via an implantable pressure sensor—12-month results from the ARGOS-02 trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2020;209:187–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. https://infomeddnews.com/eyemate-system-fda-breakthrough-device-des/.

  75. Goldman DR, Hubschman J-P, Aldave AJ, Chiang A, Huang JS, Bourges J-L, et al. Postoperative posterior segment complications in eyes treated with the Boston type I keratoprosthesis. Retina. 2013;33(3):532–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hou JH, De La Cruz J, Djalilian AR. Outcomes of Boston keratoprosthesis implantation for failed keratoplasty after keratolimbal allograft. Cornea. 2012;31(12):1432–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Dohlman JG, Foster CS, Dohlman CH. Boston Keratoprosthesis in Stevens-Johnson syndrome: a case of using infliximab to prevent tissue necrosis. Digit J Ophthalmol. 2009;15(1):5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Priddy J, Bardan AS, Tawfik HS, Liu C. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the medium-and long-term outcomes of the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2019;38(11):1465–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Kaufman AR, Cruzat A, Colby KA. Clinical outcomes using oversized Back plates in type I Boston Keratoprosthesis. Eye Contact Lens. 2018;44(6):399–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Stacy RC, Jakobiec FA, Michaud NA, Dohlman CH, Colby KA. Characterization of retrokeratoprosthetic membranes in the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129(3):310–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Rudnisky CJ, Belin MW, Todani A, Al-Arfaj K, Ament JD, Zerbe BJ, et al. Risk factors for the development of retroprosthetic membranes with Boston keratoprosthesis type 1: multicenter study results. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(5):951–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Todani A, Ciolino JB, Ament JD, Colby KA, Pineda R, Belin MW, et al. Titanium back plate for a PMMA keratoprosthesis: clinical outcomes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249(10):1515–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Talati RK, Hallak JA, Karas FI, de la Cruz J, Cortina MS. Retroprosthetic membrane formation in Boston Keratoprosthesis: a case–control-matched comparison of titanium versus PMMA Backplate. Cornea. 2018;37(2):145–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Sivaraman KR, Hou JH, Allemann N, de la Cruz J, Cortina MS. Retroprosthetic membrane and risk of sterile keratolysis in patients with type I Boston Keratoprosthesis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;155(5):814–22. e2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Geoffrion D, Harissi-Dagher M. Glaucoma risk factors and outcomes following Boston keratoprosthesis type 1 surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 2021;226:56–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Akpek EK, Harissi-Dagher M, Petrarca R, Butrus SI, Pineda R II, Aquavella JV, et al. Outcomes of Boston keratoprosthesis in aniridia: a retrospective multicenter study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144(2):227–31. e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Harissi-Dagher M, Dohlman CH. The Boston Keratoprosthesis in severe ocular trauma. Can J Ophthalmol. 2008;43(2):165–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Panarelli JF, Ko A, Sidoti PA, Garcia JP, Banitt MR. Angle closure after Boston keratoprosthesis. J Glaucoma. 2013;22(9):725–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Geoffrion D, Hassanaly SI, Marchand M, Daoud R, Agoumi Y, Harissi-Dagher M. Assessment of the role and timing of glaucoma surgery in Boston Keratoprosthesis type 1 patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 2022;235:249–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Lin M, Bhatt A, Haider A, Kim G, Farid M, Schmutz M, et al. Vision retention in early versus delayed glaucoma surgical intervention in patients with Boston keratoprosthesis type 1. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182190.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Crnej A, Paschalis EI, Salvador-Culla B, Tauber A, Drnovsek-Olup B, Shen LQ, et al. Glaucoma progression and role of glaucoma surgery in patients with Boston keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2014;33(4):349–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Schlote T, Derse M, Rassmann K, Nicaeus T, Dietz K, Thiel H-J. Efficacy and safety of contact transscleral diode laser cyclophotocoagulation for advanced glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2001;10(4):294–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Robert M-C, Dohlman CH. A review of corneal melting after Boston keratoprosthesis. Semin Ophthalmol. 2014;29(5-6):349–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Daoud R, Sabeti S, Harissi-Dagher M. Management of corneal melt in patients with Boston Keratoprosthesis type 1: repair versus repeat. Ocul Surf. 2020;18(4):713–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Utine CA, Tzu JH, Akpek EK. Clinical features and prognosis of Boston type I keratoprosthesis-associated corneal melt. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2011;19(6):413–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Dudenhoefer E, Nouri M, Gipson I, Baratz K, Tisdale A, Dryja T, et al. Histopathology of explanted collar button keratoprostheses: a clinicopathologic correlation. Cornea. 2003;22(5):424–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Barnes SD, Dohlman CH, Durand ML. Fungal colonization and infection in Boston keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2007;26(1):9–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Nouri M, Terada H, Alfonso EC, Foster CS, Durand ML, Dohlman CH. Endophthalmitis after keratoprosthesis: incidence, bacterial causes, and risk factors. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119(4):484–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Bostan C, Nayman T, Szigiato A-A, Morfeq H, Harissi-Dagher M. Endophthalmitis in eyes with the Boston type I keratoprosthesis: incidence, recurrence, risk factors, and outcomes. Cornea. 2021;40(10):1258–66.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Robert M-C, Moussally K, Harissi-Dagher M. Review of endophthalmitis following Boston keratoprosthesis type 1. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(6):776–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Klufas MA, Yannuzzi NA, D'Amico DJ, Kiss S. Vitreoretinal aspects of permanent keratoprosthesis. Surv Ophthalmol. 2015;60(3):216–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Bonnet C, Chehaibou I, Ghaffari R, Jackson NJ, Bostan C, Hubschman J-P, et al. Idiopathic vitritis after Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation: incidence, risk factors and outcomes in a multicentric cohort. Ocul Immunol Inflamm. 2020;1-7:769.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Grassi CM, Crnej A, Paschalis EI, Colby KA, Dohlman CH, Chodosh J. Idiopathic vitritis in the setting of Boston keratoprosthesis. Cornea. 2015;34(2):165–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Nouri M, Durand ML, Dohlman CH. Sudden reversible vitritis after keratoprosthesis: an immune phenomenon? Cornea. 2005;24(8):915–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Bonnet C, Chehaibou I, Chen A, Bourges J-L, Markovic D, Hubschman J-P, et al. Postoperative posterior segment complications after Boston type 1 Keratoprosthesis: incidence, risk factors, and intermediate-term outcomes. Retina. 2021;41(12):2499–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Jardeleza MSR, Rheaume M-A, Chodosh J, Lane AM, Dohlman CH. Retinal detachments after Boston Keratoprosthesis: incidence, predisposing factors, and visual outcomes. Digit J Ophthalmol. 2015;21(4):1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Ray S, Khan BF, Dohlman CH, D'Amico DJ. Management of vitreoretinal complications in eyes with permanent keratoprosthesis. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(5):559–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Dokey A, Ramulu PY, Utine CA, Tzu JH, Eberhart CG, Shan S, et al. Chronic hypotony associated with the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;154(2):266–71. e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Alio JL, Abdelghany AA, Abu-Mustafa SK, Zein G. A new epidescemetic keratoprosthesis: pilot investigation and proof of concept of a new alternative solution for corneal blindness. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(11):1483–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Studeny P, Krizova D, Kuchynka P. Use of pocketmaker microkeratome for creation of corneal pocket for foldable keratoprosthesis keraklear implantation–case series. Open J Ophthalmol. 2015;9:126.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Duncker GI, Storsberg J, Müller-Lierheim WG. The fully synthetic, bio-coated MIRO® CORNEA UR keratoprosthesis: development, preclinical testing, and first clinical results. Spektrum der Augenheilkunde. 2014;28(6):250–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Akpek EK, Glass S, Schmiedel T, Troutman M. Short-term clinical outcomes of a novel corneal prosthetic device in a rabbit model. Cornea. 2020;39(6):706–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Litvin G, Klein I, Litvin Y, Klaiman G, Nyska A. CorNeat KPro: ocular implantation study in rabbits. Cornea. 2021;40(9):1165.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Anthony J. Aldave, MD, David Geffen School of Medicine. Stein Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Mona Harissi-Dagher, MD, Department of Opthalmlmology, Centre Hospotaler de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. David Geffen School of Medicine, Stein Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Reza Ghaffari & Ali Massoudi

Authors
  1. Reza Ghaffari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Massoudi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Ghaffari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Edmund Tsui

  2. Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Simon S. M. Fung

  3. Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Rohan Bir Singh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ghaffari, R., Massoudi, A. (2023). Keratoprosthesis. In: Tsui, E., Fung, S.S.M., Singh, R.B. (eds) Current Advances in Ocular Surgery. Current Practices in Ophthalmology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1661-0_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1661-0_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-1660-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-1661-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation