March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
Clinical Results After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty vs. Penetrating Keratoplasty
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Philip Maier
    University Eye Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
  • Sonja Heinzelmann
    University Eye Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
  • Philipp Eberwein
    University Eye Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
  • Florian Birnbaum
    Eye Hospital Bremen Mitte, Bremen, Germany
  • Daniel Böhringer
    University Eye Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
  • Thomas Reinhard
    University Eye Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Philip Maier, None; Sonja Heinzelmann, None; Philipp Eberwein, None; Florian Birnbaum, None; Daniel Böhringer, None; Thomas Reinhard, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 64. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Philip Maier, Sonja Heinzelmann, Philipp Eberwein, Florian Birnbaum, Daniel Böhringer, Thomas Reinhard; Clinical Results After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty vs. Penetrating Keratoplasty. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):64.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To report results and complications following descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in comparison to penetrating keratoplasty (PKP).

Methods: : We reviewed the charts of all patients undergoing DMEK surgery in 2011 for visual acuity and complications and compared these to a historical control group of PKP. Graft survival was assessed by means of the Kaplan-Meier method. We logarithmized visual acuity for summary statistics.

Results: : Visual acuity averaged -0.89±0.78 logMAR before DMEK and -0.82±0.49 logMAR before PKP. Patients were followed in mean 49.6±42.2 days following DMEK and 469.2±313 days following PKP. Visual acuity at last follow up visit averaged -0.47±0.62 logMAR after DMEK and -0.47±0.46 afer PKP. 65% of patients after DMEK as well as after PKP reached a visual acuity >=0.5, whereas 40% after DMEK and 22% after PKP reached a visual acuity of >=0.8. A second surgical intervention after DMEK was necessary in 22% of the patients after DMEK (24% after PKP) and 14% of the grafts suffered failure after DMEK compared to 16% after PKP. Endothelial cell density averaged 1257+/520cells/mm2 after DMEK and 1497±522cell/mm² after PKP.

Conclusions: : DMEK is a promising method for curing diseases of the corneal endothelium, reaching a much faster visual recovery compared to PKP. However, longer follow up is required to assess longevity of the grafts.

Keywords: cornea: clinical science • cornea: endothelium 
×
×

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.

×