Journals / MN Oftalmoloji / 2021 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3

Early Keratoplasty Experiences of a Newly Established Eye Bank in a Tertiary Referral Center

Üçüncü Basamak Sevk Merkezinde Yeni Kurulan Bir Göz Bankasının Erken Dönem Keratoplasti Deneyimleri

Pages
175–179
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: This study shows that there is serious visual achievements after keratoplasty, the chance of success is low in patients with high rejection risk, however, an acceptable success is achieved in patients with no high risk of rejection.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the indications, results and complications of patients who underwent partial penetrating keratoplasty with different diagnoses in a newly established eye bank.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Sixty-four eyes of 62 patients who underwent keratoplasty with different diagnoses between January 2018 and October 2019 were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: This study shows that there is serious visual achievements after keratoplasty, the chance of success is low in patients with high rejection risk, however, an acceptable success is achieved in patients with no high risk of rejection.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the indications, results and complications of patients who underwent partial penetrating keratoplasty with different diagnoses in a newly established eye bank. Material and Method: Sixty-four eyes of 62 patients who underwent keratoplasty with different diagnoses between January 2018 and October 2019 were included in the study. Indications of keratoplasty, pre- and postoperative examination findings, surgical techniques, postoperative treatment, intraoperative-postoperative complications and graft status at the end of the follow-up period were recorded. Patients with high graft rejection risk were included in group 1 (n=15), patients with low graft rejection risk were included in group 2 (n=49). Results: While the mean best corrected visual acuity before surgery was 0.022±0.05, after surgery was 0.2±0.22 and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.0001). It was observed that the most common indication of keratoplasty was pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (51.6%) followed by keratoconus (17.2%). At the end of the follow-up period, the rate of clear graft in the patients in group 1 was 64.3%, while in group 2 was 84.8% and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.039). When the early and late complications occurring after surgery were evaluated, determined that the most common complication was suture-related complications (31.3%). Conclusion: This study shows that there is serious visual achievements after keratoplasty, the chance of success is low in patients with high rejection risk, however, an acceptable success is achieved in patients with no high risk of rejection.

Özet

Amaç: Yeni kurulan bir göz bankası bünyesinde farklı tanılarla keratoplasti uygulanan hastaların endikasyonları, sonuçları ve komplikasyonları açısından değerlendirmek.Gereç ve Yöntem: Ocak 2018 - Ekim 2019 tarihleri arasında farklı tanılar ile keratoplasti uygulanan 62 hastanın 64 gözü çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastaların keratoplasti endikasyonları, cerrahi öncesi ve sonrasında muayene bulguları, uygulanan cerrahi, cerrahi sonrasındaki tedavi, icerrahi öncesi-cerrahi sonrasındaki komplikasyonlar ve takip süresi sonundaki greft durumu ile ilgili bilgiler taranarakkaydedildi. Greft rejeksiyon riski yüksek olan hastalar grup 1’e (n=15), greft rejeksiyon riski düşük olan hastalar grup 2’ye (n=49) dahil edildi.Bulgular: Cerrahi öncesindeki en iyi düzeltilmiş görme keskinliği ortalaması 0,022±0,05 iken, cerrahi sonrasında 0,2±0,22 idi ve aradaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı (p<0,0001). En sık cerrahi endikasyonun psödofakik büllöz keratopati olduğu (%51,6) ve bunukeratokonusun (%17,2) izlediği görüldü. Takip süresi sonunda grup 1’de yer alan hastalardaki saydam greft oranı %64,3 iken, grup 2’debu oran %84,8 idi ve aradaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı (p=0,039). Cerrahi sonrasında meydana gelen erken ve geç komplikasyonlar değerlendirildiğinde en sık görülen komplikasyonun sütür ile ilişkili (%31,3) olduğu saptandı.Sonuç: Sunulan çalışma keratoplasti sonrasında ciddi görme kazanımının olduğunu, red riski yüksek olan hastalardaki başarı şansınındüştüğünü, bununla birlikte red riski yüksek olmayan hastalarda kabul edilebilir bir başarı yakalandığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAÇOCUK, T., DURSUN, Ö., VATANSEVER, M., DİNÇ, E., ÖZER, Ö., TEMEL, G. O., ADIGÜZEL, U. (2021). Early Keratoplasty Experiences of a Newly Established Eye Bank in a Tertiary Referral Center. MN Oftalmoloji, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3, 175–179. https://ajindex.com/articles/340929

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Tan DTH. Dart JKG. Holland EJ. Kinoshita S. Corneal transplantation. The Lancet. 2012;379(9827):1749-61
  2. Galvis V. Tello A. Laiton AN. Salcedo SL. Indications and techniques of corneal transplantation in a referral center in Colombia. South America (2012-2016). Int Ophthalmol. 2019;39(8):1723-33
  3. Le R. Yucel N. Khattak S. Yucel YH. Prud’homme GJ. Gupta N. Current indications and surgical approaches to corneal transplants at the University of Toronto: a clinical-pathological study. Can J Ophthalmol. 2017;52(1):74-9
  4. Dickman MM. Peeters JM. van den Biggelaar FJ. et al. Changing practice patterns and long-term outcomes of endothelial versus penetrating keratoplasty: a prospective Dutch registry study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;170:133-42
  5. Darlington JK. Adrean SD. Schwab IR. Trends of penetrating keratoplasty in the United States from 1980 to 2004. Ophthalmology. 2006;113(12):2171
  6. Dorrepaal SJ. Cao KY. Slomovic AR. Indications for penetrating keratoplasty in a tertiary referral centre in Canada. 1996–2004. Can J Ophthalmol. 2007;42(2):244-50
  7. Kanavi MR. Javadi MA. Sanagoo M. Indications for penetrating keratoplasty in Iran. Cornea. 2007;26(5):561-3
  8. Cunningham WJ. Brookes NH. Twohill HC. et al. Trends in the distribution of donor corneal tissue and indications for corneal transplantation: the New Zealand National Eye Bank Study. 2000- 2009. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2012;40(2):141-7
  9. Yaholom C. Mechoulam H. Solomon A. Raiskup FD. Peer J. Pery JF. Forty years of changing indications in penetrating keratoplasty in Israel. Cornea. 2005;24(3):256-8
  10. Dasar L. Pujar C. Gill KS. Patil M. Salagar M. Indications of penetrating keratoplasty in Southern India. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(11):2505-7
  11. Xie L. Song Z. Zhao J. Shi W. Wang F. Indications for penetrating keratoplasty in North China. Cornea. 2007;20(9):1070-3
  12. Altay Y. Burcu A. Aksoy G. Özdemir EŞ. Örnek F. Changing indications and techniques for corneal transplantations at a tertiary referral center in Turkey. from 1995 to 2014. Clinical Ophthal mo - logy. 2016:1007-13
  13. Çubuk M. Koçluk Y. Özelbaykal B. Penetran keratoplastili olgularda endikasyon dağılımları ve klinik sonuçlarımız. T Klini J Ophthalmol. 2019;28(4):273-80
  14. Jamali H. Gholampour AR. Indications and surgical techniques for corneal transplantation at a tertiary referral center. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2019;14(2):125-30
  15. Quigley C. McElnea E. Fahy G. Trends in corneal transplant surgery in Ireland: indica