Five-year follow-up of corneal morphology and corneal refractive power changes after uneventful DMEK
- PMID: 35122501
- DOI: 10.1007/s00417-022-05571-3
Five-year follow-up of corneal morphology and corneal refractive power changes after uneventful DMEK
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate changes of corneal thickness spatial profile (CTSP), corneal volume (CV) distribution, and total corneal refractive power (TCRP) over a course of 60 months after uneventful Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).
Methods: In our prospective, comparative study, sixty DMEK cases without intraoperative and postoperative complications and with complete 60-month follow-up were included (group 1). CTSP at corneal apex (CCT) and at 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm, and 8 mm rings, CV in 3 mm, 5 mm, 7 mm, and 10 mm zones, and TCRF in 2 mm, 4 mm 6 mm, and 8 mm zones were evaluated preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 60 months postoperatively. The 60-month results were compared to an age-matched group of uncomplicated pseudophakic eyes (group 2; n = 20).
Results: The CCT and CTSP at 2, 4, and 6 mm increased significantly at 60 months compared to 3-month outcomes (P < 0.001). Similarly, CV increased significantly in 3 mm, 5 mm, and 7 mm zones at 60 months compared to 3 months outcomes (P < 0.001). The TCRP showed in all zones a significant decrease at 3 months (P < 0.001) followed by a continuous and significant increase at 60 months (P < 0.001). The 60-month CCT and CTSP at 2 mm were similar to group 2 (P ≥ 0.094).
Conclusion: Sixty months after uneventful DMEK, CT within the central 2 mm zone and CV at 3 mm zone were similar to uncomplicated pseudophakic eyes. A continuous and statistically significant increase of TCRP was observed in all measured zones after the 3-month examination.
Keywords: Corneal thickness; DMEK; Power; Tomography; Volume.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Droutsas K, Giallouros E, Melles GR, Chatzistefanou K, Sekundo W (2013) Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: learning curve of a single surgeon. Cornea 32:1075–1079. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e31828f0e3c - DOI - PubMed
-
- Peraza-Nieves J, Baydoun L, Dapena I, Ilyas A, Frank LE, Luceri S, Ham L, Oellerich S, Melles GRJ (2017) Two-year clinical outcome of 500 consecutive cases undergoing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 36:655–660. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000001176 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Goldich Y, Showail M, Avni-Zauberman N, Perez M, Ulate R, Elbaz U, Rootman DS (2015) Contralateral eye comparison of descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 159:155–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2014.10.009 - DOI - PubMed
-
- 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 35:765–771. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000000822 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Singh A, Zarei-Ghanavati M, Avadhanam V, Liu C (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty versus Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty/Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 36:1437–1443. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000001320 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
