4.6 Article

Parameters Associated With Endothelial Cell Density Variability After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 211, Issue -, Pages 22-30

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.10.017

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To evaluate which parameters may affect endothelial cell loss after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) by comparing eyes in the low vs high quartile of endothelial cell loss over a follow-up period of 4 years. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Donor endothelial cell density (ECD) decline was evaluated for 351 eyes of 275 patients up to 4 years after DMEK for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD). Eyes with a postoperative endothelial cell loss in the lower quartile at all available follow-up moments were assigned to Group 1 (n = 51) and those in the upper quartile to Group 2 (n = 42). Multinomial regression was used to assess which covariates were related to greater ECD decline. RESULTS: Mean endothelial cell loss as compared to preoperative donor ECD for the entire study group was 33 (+/- 16)%, 36 (+/- 17)%, and 52 (+/- 18)% at 1, 6, and 48 months postoperatively. Endothelial cell loss of Group 1 was 12 (+/- 7)%, 13 (6)%, and 26 (+/- 8)% at, respectively, 1, 6, and 48 months postoperatively, and 59 (+/- 10)%, 64 (+/- 9)%, and 75 (+/- 5)% in Group 2. Partial graft detachment, donor death cause cardiovascular/stroke (vs cancer), postoperative complications other than graft detachment, and severity of preoperative FECD (all P<.01) showed the strongest relation with greater ECD decline. CONCLUSIONS: DMEK eyes with a completely attached graft and operated in an early stage of FECD may show the lowest endothelial cell loss postoperatively. ((C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available