April 2014
Volume 55, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2014
Repeated Penetrating Corneal Transplantation in an University Hospital
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Paulo Rodolfo Tagliari Barbisan
    Ophthalmology, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
  • Rosane Silvestre de Castro
    Ophthalmology, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Paulo Rodolfo Barbisan, None; Rosane Castro, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2014, Vol.55, 3150. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Paulo Rodolfo Tagliari Barbisan, Rosane Silvestre de Castro; Repeated Penetrating Corneal Transplantation in an University Hospital. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):3150.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: To determine factors influencing penetrating corneal graft survival in patients undergoing tectonic transplants, receiving repeat grafts in the same eye after a failed first graft.

Methods: Retrospective review of patients undergoing repeat penetrating corneal transplantation, from November of 2008 to November of 2012. Comparative analysis of visual acuity, intraocular pressure and corneal transparency before surgery and after one year.

Results: 318 patients who underwent penetrating keratoplasty in the period from November of 2008 to November of 2012 were evaluated. Among the 318 transplants, the primary causes for the indication were: 199 (62.57%) Tectonic Transplantation, 65 (20.44%) Keratoconus, 23 (7.23%) Corneal Dystrophies, 17 (5.34%) Bullous Keratopathy and 14 (4.40%) Opacities / Scars. Of the 199 patients who underwent Tectonic Tranplantation, 36 were subjected to re-graft and regrafts were performed more than once in 2 eyes. The primary reasons to conduct a re-graft were Rejection [24 patiens (63.15%)], Primary Graft Failure [8 patiens (21.05%)] and Infection [6 patiens (15.78%)]. Analysis of the re-graft showed visual acuity improvement in 20 (52.63%), worsening in 8 (21.05%) and unchanged in 10 (26.31%); intraocular pressure improvement in 3 (7.89%), worsening in 3 (7.89%) and unchanged in 32 (84.21%); corneal transparency improvement in 25 (65.78%), worsening in 4 (10.52%) and unchanged in 9 (23.68%) patiens.

Conclusions: In a university hospital of reference there are high rates of tectonic transplants, since many patients are victims of trauma, corneal infection and corneal perforation. Thus, there is a higher rate of rejection, because the eyes have non-optimal conditions for a successful surgery (inflammation, infection, perforation), so it is more susceptible to regraft. Due to the urgency in which transplants are performed, there is also a high rate of primary failure, because the eye bank’s corneas used to perform the transplant, often are not optical corneas and of a poorer quality.

Keywords: 741 transplantation • 479 cornea: clinical science  

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.