These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty: comparative outcomes with microkeratome-dissected and manually dissected donor tissue.
    Author: Price MO, Price FW.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2006 Nov; 113(11):1936-42. PubMed ID: 16935344.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare outcomes with 2 donor dissection methods for Descemet's stripping with endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK). DESIGN: Retrospective, comparative, nonrandomized case series. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred thirty consecutive transplants, 114 with manually dissected and 216 with microkeratome-dissected donor tissue. METHODS: Donor posterior stroma/endothelium was transplanted, after stripping recipient Descemet's membrane/endothelium and dissecting the donor tissue by hand or with a microkeratome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidences of donor perforation and donor detachment were compared for all eyes. Visual and refractive outcomes were compared for the first 100 consecutive eyes in each group. RESULTS: Visual recovery was faster with microkeratome-dissected donor tissue, as evidenced by statistically better best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (VA) in that group 1 month after surgery (P = 0.015). Best spectacle-corrected VA was statistically comparable for the 2 groups preoperatively and 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Best spectacle-corrected VA was not correlated significantly with postoperative central corneal thickness (P = 0.25). Corneal thickness was significantly higher in the microkeratome group (690+/-77 mum, compared with 610+/-62 mum after hand dissection; P<0.0001). Mean refractive astigmatism was 1.5 diopters (D) preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively in both groups. Spherical equivalent refraction did not change in the microkeratome group (P = 0.64) but increased by 0.66 D in the hand dissection group (P = 0.0007). Methods designed to remove fluid from the donor/recipient graft interface ultimately reduced the detachment rate to <1% (1 in the last 140 cases). No donor perforations occurred in 216 microkeratome dissections, compared with 5 in 114 hand dissections (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Microkeratome dissection reduced the risk of donor tissue perforation, provided faster visual recovery after DSEK, and did not alter the refractive outcome.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]