July 2018
Volume 59, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2018
Comparison of DMEK and DSAEK in high and low risk posterior lamellar keratoplasty.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jesper Hjortdal
    Ophthalmology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
  • Uwe Pleyer
    Ophthalmology, Charité- Universitatsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
  • Conor C Murphy
    Ophthalmology, Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
  • Derek Tole
    Bristol Eye Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom
  • Bertrand Vabres
    Ophthalmology, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Jesper Hjortdal, None; Uwe Pleyer, None; Conor Murphy, None; Derek Tole, None; Bertrand Vabres, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  EU-FP7 Grant 602470
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2018, Vol.59, 1299. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jesper Hjortdal, Uwe Pleyer, Conor C Murphy, Derek Tole, Bertrand Vabres; Comparison of DMEK and DSAEK in high and low risk posterior lamellar keratoplasty.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):1299.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose : Corneal transplantation is overall a successful procedure, but graft failure due to immunological reactions is common. The current presentation focus on a comparison of the rate of immune reactions, cause and rate of failure, and visual acuity in DMEK and DSAEK surgeries for treatment of endothelial failure.

Methods : Patients were recruited at five European clinical sites af part of the VISICORT study (see Table 1). 183 eyes in 183 patients with endothelial failure were enrolled in this prospective, non-randomised study. Patients were included in a Low-risk group (LR) if they had Fuchs endothelial dystrophy and freedom from known risks factors for failure. Patients included in the High-risk group (HR) were those undergoing re-transplantation for a previous failed graft and/or had a diagnosis of pseudophakic bullous keratopathy or presented one or more risk factors.

Results : Currently, 162 patients have completed their 6-month review, 156 their 1 year, and 84 their 2 –year review. Significantly (p<0.01) more patient in the DMEK group (23 of 101) underwent additional air-injection compared with the DSAEK group (7 of 82), but there was no difference between eyes in the LR and HR groups (p>0.05). Primary and later failures were similar after DMEK and DSAEK (p>0.05). Less (9 of 128) eyes in the LR group experienced a rejection episode than in the HR group (15 of 55 eyes) (P<0.01), but with no difference between the DMEK and DSAEK groups (p>0.05). At all post-operative points of follow-up, visual acuity was better (p<0.05) in the DMEK compared with the DSAEK group, but after 2 years visual acuity was similar (0.74±0.25 (decimal units) in the DMEK group and 0.67±0.27 in the DSAEK group). Endothelial cell density was significantly higher in the DMEK group compared with the DSAEK group at all follow-ups (p<0.05).

Conclusions : Re-bubbling procedures are more common after DMEK compared with DSAEK, but rejection episodes occur at a similar rates. The study indicates that visual acuity after DSAEK improve over time and reaches an almost similar functional outcome in patients treated by DMEK. Follow-up of patients is continuing and around 50,000 bio-samples have been collected and stored in a biobank for immunological profiling and will be accessible to other researchers involved in corneal transplantation.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2018 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, April 29 - May 3, 2018.



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.