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: Comparison of Visual Acuity Outcomes Between Nanothin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty and Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty.
    Author: Kurji KH, Cheung AY, Eslani M, Rolfes EJ, Chachare DY, Auteri NJ, Nordlund ML, Holland EJ.
    Journal: Cornea; 2018 Oct; 37(10):1226-1231. PubMed ID: 30028748.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes and complications between nanothin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (NT-DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). METHODS: A prospective comparative case series of 28 consecutive cases of NT-DSAEK (less than or equal to 50 μm) and DMEK was undertaken. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of Fuchs dystrophy, presence of pseudophakia, or planned combined cataract surgery/endothelial keratoplasty, with a minimum of 6-month follow-up. Exclusion criteria were any concurrent ocular comorbidities. Primary outcomes measures were best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and complications. RESULTS: Mean thickness of NT-DSAEK grafts was 41.0 ± 7.5 μm (range 26-50 μm). At 1 month postoperatively, the DMEK group had significantly better mean BSCVA of 0.18 ± 0.20 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (20/33) compared with 0.28 ± 0.16 logMAR (20/40) for NT-NSAEK (P = 0.049). At 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, mean BSCVA was comparable between both groups [3 months: NT-DSAEK 0.17 ± 0.12 logMAR (20/30) versus DMEK 0.13 ± 0.17 (20/27), P = 0.31; 6 months: NT-DSAEK 0.11 ± 0.10 logMAR (20/26) versus DMEK 0.09 ± 0.10 (20/25), P = 0.63; 12 months: NT-DSAEK 0.07 ± 0.09 logMAR (20/24) versus DMEK 0.07 ± 0.11 logMAR (20/24), P = 0.95]. Other than 1 NT-DSAEK graft that was successfully rebubbled, no other complications were encountered in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DMEK, NT-DSAEK provides comparable visual outcomes and complications rates.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]