Purchase this article with an account.
Enrique O Graue-Hernandez, Alejandro Navas, Arturo J Ramirez-Miranda, Alexandra Abdala, Aida Jimenez-Corona, Martha Jaimes; Pachymetry assisted lamellar keratoplasty Vs penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):1228.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To compare the visual results of pachymetry assisted lamellar keratoplasty (PALK) vs. Penetrating keratoplasty (PK) for keratoconus treatment.
Retrospective comparative case series. Keratoconus II - IV Amsler-Krumeich were treated with either penetrating keratoplasty (PK) or excimer laser pachymetry assisted lamellar keratoplasty (PALK). Preoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), keratometry, pachymetry, corneal aberrometry and intraocular pressure in four postoperative evaluations. We recorded surgery related adverse events and complications and performed safety and efficacy measures for each procedure. The repeated measures ANOVA test was used to find differences in time for the main outcome variable (CDVA, UDVA) and paired t test to find differences between groups in preoperative and postoperative moments
Fourteen patients were included in each group. PK mean age was 28.92±10.6 years, 71% were female (10) and 29% male (4). PALK mean age was 26.78±7.99 years, 65% female (9) and 35% male (5), p >0.05. Preoperative UDVA in PK group was 1.49±0.4 vs.1.67±0.65 logMar in PALK (p>0.05). Preoperative CDVA was 0.83±0.37 for PK and 1±0.47 logMar for PALK (p>0.05, Postoperative UDVA in PK was 0.72±0.3 vs. 0.87±0.32 logMAR in PALK (p>0.05) figure 1a). Postoperative CDVA was 0.35±0.15 in PK vs. 0.52±0.32 logMar in PALK (p>0.05, figure 1b). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in the preoperative and postoperative periods in the keratometric power (figure 2a), pachymetry (figure 2b), high order aberrations, RMS and intraocular pressure (figure 2c). Eighty-six percent of PK patients and 79% of PALK patients won one or more lines of CDVA in the postoperative period
Both techniques had similar visual results at 6 months of follow-up and are safe and effective in the management of keratoconus.
This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only