July 2019
Volume 60, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2019
Factors Associated With Eye Bank Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Processing Damage
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Gabriel M Rand
    Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York, United States
  • Patrick Gore
    Saving Sight, Missouri, United States
  • Lynn Forest-Smith
    Saving Sight, Missouri, United States
  • Tina Livesay
    Saving Sight, Missouri, United States
  • Roy S Chuck
    Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Gabriel Rand, None; Patrick Gore, None; Lynn Forest-Smith, None; Tina Livesay, None; Roy Chuck, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2019, Vol.60, 3818. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Gabriel M Rand, Patrick Gore, Lynn Forest-Smith, Tina Livesay, Roy S Chuck; Factors Associated With Eye Bank Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Processing Damage. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2019;60(9):3818.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) has a high processing failure rate compared to Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK). A limited number of studies have identified potential risk factors for damage but more studies are needed to determine their validity. We report an analysis of potential risk factors from a previously unstudied eye bank performing high volume DMEK processing.

Methods : Retrospective study of all 385 DMEK tissues processed from 319 eligible donors at Saving Sight Eye Bank between July 2014 and June 2017. The primary outcome of interest was DMEK preparation-associated damage. Factors that were analyzed included donor past medical history, tissue characteristics, and eye bank technician characteristics. Analysis was completed with logistic regressions.

Results : There were 32 cases of processing damage (8.3%). Univariate analysis showed no significant differences in damage with respect to donor age (p=0.305), gender (p=0.738), race (p=0.275), history of hyperlipidemia (p=0.401), obesity (p=0.316), phakia (p=0.074), death to preservation time (p=0.698), death to processing time (p=0.254), and preprocessing endothelial cell density (p=0.189). Univariate analysis showed that donor diabetes mellitus (DM) was associated with more frequent damage (OR 3.38, p=0.001). 5 technicians were studied. Each technician processed between 3 and 195 DMEK tissues. Rates of damage per technician were 0.0% (0 of 3), 2.1% (1 of 47), 7.2% (14 of 195), 8.5% (7 of 82), and 17.2% (10 of 58). The technician with the highest failure rate was statistically significantly different than the other technicians combined (p=0.01). Mixed effect analysis showed that there was a statistically significant trend of more failures during the first 25 DMEK cases per technician than the later cases (p=0.011). Technician experience with DSAEK prior to their first DMEK, ranged from 14 to 1,539 cases and was not statistically significantly associated with subsequent DMEK success (p=0.416). Elimination of tissues with the statistically significant risk factors reduced the failure rate from 8.3% to 4.1%.

Conclusions : Eye bank DMEK processing has significant rates of damage. Risk factors for processing failure include donor DM status, individual technician ability, and technician learning curves.

This abstract was presented at the 2019 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Vancouver, Canada, April 28 - May 2, 2019.

×
×

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.

×