Busin glide vs forceps in Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: not all forceps insertions are created equal

Modified Method for Nanothin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe a method to achieve a high success rate for nanothin (NT, ≤50 μm) Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) graft preparation using anterior chamber pressurizer (ACP) with a modified setting and evaluate its postoperative efficacy.

METHODS

A prospective cohort (study group) of 24 patients with corneal endothelial dysfunction was consecutively enrolled and received DSAEK grafts using the modified ACP method from December 2021 to May 2022. The control group included 24 historical patients who received DSAEK grafts using conventional ACP procedure. Central graft thickness (CGT), graft regularity (3-mm and 5-mm diameter zones), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, and endothelial cell density (ECD) were compared between 2 groups.

RESULTS

A 100% ultrathin (UT, ≤100 μm) DSAEK rate and 62.5% NT-DSAEK rate was achieved at 3 months postsurgery in the study group, with a 51.3 ± 14.8 μm CGT, while a 70.8% UT-DSAEK rate and 4.2% NT-DSAEK rate was achieved in the control group, with an 89.0 ± 15.4 μm CGT (P <0.001). At 3-month postoperative follow-up, the regularity of graft thickness was significantly better in the study group (central-to-peripheral thickness difference: P = 0.044 and 0.014 for 3-mm and 5-mm diameter zones, respectively, graft thickness uniformity: P <0.001 and 0.012, respectively). There was no statistical difference in the best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.170) or ECD (P = 0.833) between 2 groups at 3-month postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

DSAEK grafts harvested using modified ACP method were thinner and more regular compared with the conventional ACP method.

Detection of herpes simplex virus type 1 in failed descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty grafts

PURPOSE

To determine the prevalence of herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) DNA in failed Descemet membrane stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) grafts.

METHODS

A retrospective interventional case series of patients with DSAEK graft failure treated at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary between January 2009 and July 2012 was performed. Repeat DSAEK, penetrating keratoplasty, or keratoprosthesis procedure was subsequently performed on eyes with failed grafts. All failed grafts were examined immunohistochemically and with qualitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for HSV-1 DNA. In HSV-1-positive cases, corneoscleral donor rims from the original DSAEK procedures were also examined immunohistochemically and with polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Fifty-one failed DSAEK grafts from 50 eyes of 49 patients were identified. Indications for DSAEK were pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (28/51, 55%), Fuchs corneal endothelial dystrophy (12/51, 23%), failed penetrating keratoplasty (7/51, 14%), corneal decompensation from glaucoma (2/51, 4%), herpetic endotheliitis (1/51, 2%), and failed DSAEK (1/51, 2%). Forty-three grafts (83%) were primary DSAEK graft failure. HSV-1 DNA was isolated from 2 of 51 failed DSAEK grafts (4.0%). The corresponding corneoscleral donor rims did not demonstrate the presence of HSV-1.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, HSV-1 infection plays a minor role in DSAEK graft failure. The data suggest that recipient reactivation, rather than donor transmission, plays a role in HSV infection.

Endothelial cell counts after Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare endothelial cell counts after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of patients from our prospective Singapore Corneal Transplant Study cohort who received corneal transplantation in 2006–2008. We compared eyes that underwent DSAEK or penetrating keratoplasty for Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy or pseudophakic and aphakic bullous keratopathy. Clinical data, and donor and recipient characteristics were recorded. Of 241 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 68 underwent DSAEK and 173 underwent penetrating keratoplasty. The main outcome measure was endothelial cell loss at 1 year. Secondary outcome measures were graft survival and visual outcomes at 1-year follow-up.

Results

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of patients between the treatment groups. Percent endothelial cell loss at 1-year follow-up was greater in penetrating keratoplasty eyes (40.9% ± 2.9%) compared with DSAEK eyes (22.4% ± 2.3%; P < 0.001). DSAEK-treated eyes had significantly superior uncorrected visual acuity (mean difference = 0.42 ± 0.0059; P < 0.001) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (mean difference = 0.14 ± 0.032; P < 0.001) as compared with penetrating keratoplasty-treated eyes. Penetrating keratoplasty-treated eyes had worse astigmatism as compared with DSAEK-treated eyes (−3.0 ± 2.1 versus −1.7 ± 0.8; P < 0.001). Graft survival at 1 year was comparable in both groups, ie, 66/68 (97.0%) DSAEK-treated eyes versus 158/173 (92.0%) of penetrating keratoplasty-treated eyes had clear grafts (P = 0.479).

Conclusion

We report lower percent endothelial cell loss comparing DSAEK and penetrating keratoplasty at 1-year follow-up in Asian eyes, with comparable graft survival rates in both groups.

Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with a graft insertion device: surgical technique and early clinical results

PURPOSE

To present the surgical technique and the early clinical results of the EndoGlide, a graft insertion device for use during Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).

DESIGN

Prospective interventional case series.

METHODS

PATIENTS

Graft insertion with the EndoGlide was performed in 25 eyes of Asian patients with endothelial dysfunction suitable for DSAEK. Demographic and clinical details, best-corrected visual acuity, postoperative complications, and endothelial cell density (ECD) loss were documented.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The prepared graft is transferred onto a preparation base and pulled into the glide capsule with forceps. Drawing the graft into the capsule curls it into a "double-coil" configuration. The assembled EndoGlide is inserted into the eye, and the graft is pulled into the anterior chamber with forceps, where it uncoils in the correct orientation with minimal manipulation.

RESULTS

Average age was 70 years (range 28-91) and the commonest diagnosis was pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (12 eyes). Preoperative donor ECD was 2957 ± 242 cells/mm(2), median graft diameter was 8.75 mm, and all surgeries were completed successfully by 2 surgeons. There was a short learning curve in loading of the graft into the EndoGlide and in uncoiling the graft in the recipient eye. No patient had graft dislocation or primary iatrogenic graft failure. At 6 months, the mean ECD was 2586 ± 338 cells/mm(2) and mean cell loss was 13.1% in 20 eyes. At 12 months, the mean ECD was 2575 ± 289 cells/mm(2) and mean cell loss was 15.6% in 10 eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft insertion with the EndoGlide is safe in DSAEK, with a short learning curve and a low endothelial cell loss at 6 and 12 months.

Clinicopathologic findings in failed descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical features of and histologic findings from failed Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK).

METHODS

This retrospective observational case series evaluated 47 consecutive corneal specimens from 42 patients who underwent either penetrating keratoplasty or repeated DSAEK for failed DSAEK. Clinical information was obtained for the cases. Sections of the specimens were examined using light microscopy. Immunohistochemical staining was performed for cytokeratins AE1/AE3 and for the myogenic marker smooth-muscle actin when indicated. Transmission electron microscopic examination was performed in some cases.

RESULTS

Graft survival ranged from 0.5 to 34 months. Histologic examination showed that 94% of the specimens (44 of 47) had endothelial cell loss. Residual host Descemet membrane (19%; 9 of 47), fibrocellular tissue (19%; 9 of 47), epithelial implantation (15%; 7 of 47), and fungal infection (4%; 2 of 47) were also identified. Immunohistochemical stains were positive for AE1/AE3 in the epithelial implantations and for smooth-muscle actin in cells in the fibrocellular proliferations.

CONCLUSIONS

The principal cause of failed DSAEK is endothelial cell loss. Residual host Descemet membrane, fibrocellular tissue at the edge of the lenticule, and epithelial implantation are common histologic findings. Fungal infection may occur in the setting of DSAEK.