4.4 Review

DMEK graft: One size does not fit all

Journal

ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA
Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages E14-E25

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aos.15202

Keywords

corneal transplant; descemetorhexis; DMEK; folding; graft size; large graft; small graft

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is a popular surgical procedure for treating Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) and pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). The size of the graft is crucial for the success of the procedure, with smaller grafts being preferred. However, larger diameter grafts pose challenges due to higher detachment rates.
Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is a popular procedure for the treatment of corneal endothelial diseases mainly targeting Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) and pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). Although DMEK has multiple advantages, it is challenging in terms of graft preparation and delivery. One of the crucial factors of DMEK graft preparation is determining the size of the graft. Evaluating risks and benefits of transplanting larger or smaller grafts compared with the descemetorhexis performed following a standard DMEK procedure thus becomes important. Advanced techniques like pre-loaded DMEK requires pre-selection of graft diameter without physical examination of the eye making it more challenging. Therefore, recognizing the benefits of graft size and the number of transplanted endothelial cells becomes essential. Smaller DMEK grafts have been preferred and accepted for grafting. Larger diameter grafts have advantages but can be challenging due to higher detachment rates. We thus aim to review the challenges of preparing and delivering DMEK tissues with small or large diameter based on selected descemetorhexis area, discuss the outcomes based on different graft sizes, highlight related complications and suggest which cases may benefit from adopting smaller or larger graft size.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available