Graft adhesion in descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty dependent on size of removal of host's descemet membrane.

IMPORTANCE It is essential to devise strategies that improve graft adhesion after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) to reduce the rebubbling rate. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the influence of the extent of descemetorhexis on graft adhesion properties after DMEK. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Single-surgeon, retrospective, observational case series conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, that reviewed the medical records of 200 consecutive patients undergoing DMEK. Fifty-three eyes of 51 patients undergoing DMEK for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy fulfilling the inclusion criteria were enrolled in this study. Based on intraoperative drawings, postoperative slitlamp examination, and photographs, eyes were divided into 2 groups. The diameter of the descemetorhexis was approximately 10 mm in group A (30 eyes), resulting in a peripheral 1-mm zone of denuded stroma between the graft and the host's Descemet membrane, and approximately 6 mm in group B (23 eyes), resulting in a peripheral 1-mm zone of overlapping between the graft and the host's Descemet membrane. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Graft detachment rate, extent of graft detachment (in clock hours of graft's circumference), and rebubbling rate. RESULTS Four days after DMEK, the graft detachment rate was 33.3% (10 of 30) in group A and 78.3% (18 of 23) in group B (P = .002). The mean (SD) extent of graft detachment was 0.6 (0.9) and 2.8 (2.5) clock hours in groups A and B, respectively (P < .001), 4 days after surgery. The rebubbling rate was 6.7% (2 of 30) and 30.4% (7 of 23) for groups A and B, respectively (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A larger descemetorhexis in DMEK is correlated with better graft adhesion and lower rebubbling rates. Therefore, patients with a larger descemetorhexis require less intensive follow-up.

[1]  I. Dapena,et al.  Predictive value of optical coherence tomography in graft attachment after Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty. , 2013, Ophthalmology.

[2]  Ruth Quilendrino,et al.  Near complete visual recovery and refractive stability in modern corneal transplantation: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). , 2013, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[3]  Roni M. Shtein,et al.  Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in the United States. , 2013, American journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  F. Kruse,et al.  Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty versus descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. , 2012, American journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  D. Tan,et al.  Endothelial keratoplasty: a revolution in evolution. , 2012, Survey of ophthalmology.

[6]  Laurence E. Frank,et al.  Prevention and management of graft detachment in descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. , 2012, Archives of ophthalmology.

[7]  Frederico P. Guerra,et al.  Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty: prospective study of 1-year visual outcomes, graft survival, and endothelial cell loss. , 2011, Ophthalmology.

[8]  Frederico P. Guerra,et al.  Endothelial Keratoplasty: Fellow Eyes Comparison of Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty and Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty , 2011, Cornea.

[9]  U. Schlötzer-Schrehardt,et al.  Characterization of the cleavage plane in DESCemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty. , 2011, Ophthalmology.

[10]  Laurence E. Frank,et al.  Patterns of corneal endothelialization and corneal clearance after descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for fuchs endothelial dystrophy. , 2011, American journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  S. Chaurasia,et al.  Clinical profile of graft detachment and outcomes of rebubbling after Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty , 2011, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[12]  U. Schlötzer-Schrehardt,et al.  A Stepwise Approach to Donor Preparation and Insertion Increases Safety and Outcome of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty , 2011, Cornea.

[13]  U. Schlötzer-Schrehardt,et al.  Evidence of endothelial cell migration after descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. , 2011, American journal of ophthalmology.

[14]  K. Droutsas,et al.  Standardized "no-touch" technique for descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. , 2011, Archives of ophthalmology.

[15]  I. Kaiserman,et al.  The Effect of Successful Rebubbling After Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty on Endothelial Cell Counts , 2010, Cornea.

[16]  S. Debanne,et al.  Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty outcomes compared with penetrating keratoplasty from the Cornea Donor Study. , 2010, Ophthalmology.

[17]  K. Hammersmith Descemet's Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty: Prospective Multicenter Study of Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Endothelial Survival , 2010 .

[18]  M. Terry,et al.  Endothelial keratoplasty for Fuchs' dystrophy with cataract: complications and clinical results with the new triple procedure. , 2009, Ophthalmology.

[19]  I. Bahar,et al.  Comparison of posterior lamellar keratoplasty techniques to penetrating keratoplasty. , 2008, Ophthalmology.

[20]  G. Melles Posterior lamellar keratoplasty: DLEK to DSEK to DMEK. , 2006, Cornea.

[21]  Mark S Gorovoy,et al.  Descemet-Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty , 2006, Cornea.

[22]  G. Melles,et al.  Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). , 2006, Cornea.

[23]  F. Price,et al.  Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty in 50 eyes: a refractive neutral corneal transplant. , 2005, Journal of refractive surgery.