Long-term outcomes of the aphakic snap-on Boston type I keratoprosthesis at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute

Purpose To determine the indications, long-term clinical and visual outcomes, and complications of the aphakic snap-on type I Boston keratoprosthesis (KPro). Design Retrospective, non-comparative case series. Methods Forty-five eyes of 43 patients with type I aphakic snap-on KPros with at least 1 year of follow-up were included. The past medical histories, preoperative indications, best-corrected visual acuities (BCVAs), postoperative complications, and retention rates were analyzed. Results The most common indication for KPro implantation was a failed corneal graft (89%). The mean preoperative BCVA was count fingers–hand motion (2.14±0.45 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]), which initially improved to 20/200 (1.04±0.85 logMAR; P<0.0001). At the last examination, 24 eyes (53%) maintained some visual gain, 22% retained their preoperative visual acuity, and 24% lost vision due to postoperative events and underlying ocular comorbidities. Postoperative complications included retroprosthetic membranes (8/45, 18%), corneal melts (5/45, 11%), glaucoma progression (6/45, 13%), and endophthalmitis or sterile vitritis (6/45, 13%). The KPro retention rate was 89%, with a mean follow-up of 51 months. The mean BCVA at the last visit was 20/1,400 (1.82±0.92 logMAR). Conclusion Most patients experienced improved visual acuity after the implantation of the aphakic, snap-on type I KPro; however, the visual gains were not sustained over time, correlating with the onset of postoperative complications.

[1]  J. Parel,et al.  Impact of Total Pars Plana Vitrectomy on Postoperative Complications in Aphakic, Snap-On, Type 1 Boston Keratoprosthesis. , 2017, Ophthalmology.

[2]  M. Belin,et al.  Visual Acuity Outcomes of the Boston Keratoprosthesis Type 1: Multicenter Study Results. , 2016, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  Sueko M Ng,et al.  Boston Type 1 Keratoprosthesis versus Repeat Donor Keratoplasty for Corneal Graft Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. , 2016, Ophthalmology.

[4]  J. Chodosh,et al.  Idiopathic Vitritis in the Setting of Boston Keratoprosthesis , 2015, Cornea.

[5]  L. Tian,et al.  Effectiveness of Transscleral Cyclophotocoagulation as Adjuvant Therapy for Refractory Glaucoma in Keratoprosthesis Patients , 2015, European journal of ophthalmology.

[6]  K. Lekhanont,et al.  Medium-term Outcomes of Boston Type 1 Keratoprosthesis Implantation in Bangkok, Thailand , 2014, Cornea.

[7]  Sueko M Ng,et al.  Artificial corneas versus donor corneas for repeat corneal transplants. , 2014, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[8]  Beatriz Munoz,et al.  Long-term outcomes of boston type 1 keratoprosthesis implantation: a retrospective multicenter cohort. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[9]  E. Naumova,et al.  Infectious endophthalmitis in Boston keratoprosthesis: incidence and prevention , 2014, Acta ophthalmologica.

[10]  A. Lin,et al.  Histopathological and immunohistochemical analysis of melt-associated retroprosthetic membranes in the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. , 2014, JAMA ophthalmology.

[11]  C. Dohlman,et al.  A Review of Corneal Melting after Boston Keratoprosthesis , 2014, Seminars in ophthalmology.

[12]  J. Parel,et al.  Use of intraocular video endoscopic examination in the preoperative evaluation of keratoprosthesis surgery to assess visual potential. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[13]  Lucy Q. Shen,et al.  Glaucoma Progression and Role of Glaucoma Surgery in Patients With Boston Keratoprosthesis , 2014, Cornea.

[14]  V. Chopra,et al.  Glaucoma management in Boston keratoprosthesis type I recipients , 2014, Current opinion in ophthalmology.

[15]  M. Banitt,et al.  Angle Closure After Boston Keratoprosthesis , 2013, Journal of glaucoma.

[16]  N. Allemann,et al.  Retroprosthetic membrane and risk of sterile keratolysis in patients with type I Boston Keratoprosthesis. , 2013, American journal of ophthalmology.

[17]  K. Miyata,et al.  [Long-term outcomes of Boston keratoprosthesis]. , 2013, Nippon Ganka Gakkai zasshi.

[18]  F. Yu,et al.  International results with the Boston type I keratoprosthesis. , 2012, Ophthalmology.

[19]  J. Stein,et al.  Glaucoma Associated With Boston Type I Keratoprosthesis , 2012, Cornea.

[20]  T. Vajaranant,et al.  Long-term complications associated with glaucoma drainage devices and Boston keratoprosthesis. , 2011, American journal of ophthalmology.

[21]  C. A. Utine,et al.  Visual and clinical outcomes of explantation versus preservation of the intraocular lens during keratoprosthesis implantation , 2011, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[22]  M. Mannis,et al.  Longer-term vision outcomes and complications with the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis at the University of California, Davis. , 2011, Ophthalmology.

[23]  N. Michaud,et al.  Characterization of retrokeratoprosthetic membranes in the Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis. , 2011, Archives of ophthalmology.

[24]  M. Banitt Evaluation and management of glaucoma after keratoprosthesis , 2011, Current opinion in ophthalmology.

[25]  O. Comyn,et al.  Keratoprostheses in clinical practice – a review , 2010, Clinical & experimental ophthalmology.

[26]  J. Chodosh,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of the Boston keratoprosthesis. , 2010, American journal of ophthalmology.

[27]  E. Cohen,et al.  Boston Keratoprosthesis Outcomes and Complications , 2009, Cornea.

[28]  C. Grosskreutz,et al.  Glaucoma and Keratoprosthesis Surgery: Role of Adjunctive Cyclophotocoagulation , 2009, Journal of glaucoma.

[29]  F. Yu,et al.  The Boston type I keratoprosthesis: improving outcomes and expanding indications. , 2009, Ophthalmology.

[30]  K. Hammersmith The Boston Type I Keratoprosthesis: Improving Outcomes and Expanding Indications , 2009 .

[31]  M. Bach,et al.  Resolving the clinical acuity categories “hand motion” and “counting fingers” using the Freiburg Visual Acuity Test (FrACT) , 2008, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[32]  M. Belin,et al.  Results from the multicenter Boston Type 1 Keratoprosthesis Study. , 2006, Ophthalmology.

[33]  M. B. Goren The Eye Bank Association of America. , 2006, Comprehensive ophthalmology update.

[34]  J. Graney,et al.  Repeat Penetrating Keratoplasty versus the Boston Keratoprosthesis in Graft Failure , 2005, International ophthalmology clinics.

[35]  U. Rehany,et al.  The profile of repeated corneal transplantation. , 2001, Ophthalmology.

[36]  M. Doane,et al.  Keratoprosthesis: Preoperative Prognostic Categories , 2001, Cornea.