Amaç: Kliniğimizde penetran keratoplasti yapılan hastalarımızın endikasyonlarını ve klinik sonuçlarını sunmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Haziran 2014-Aralık 2015 tarihleri arasında kliniğimizde penetran keratoplasti yapılan hastaların kayıtları retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Hastaların yaşı, cinsiyeti, penetran keratoplasti endikasyonları ve operasyon tipi (tek başına keratoplasti veya kombine cerrahiler), preoperatif ve postoperatif birinci ay, üçüncü ay ve en son yapılan kontrol muayenesindeki (12. ay) düzeltilmiş en iyi görme keskinlikleri, göz içi basınç değişimleri ve ameliyat sonrası diğer bulguları detaylı olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Toplam 151 [56 (%37,1)]'sı kadın, 95 (%62,9)'i erkek hastanın 151 gözü çalışma kapsamına alındı. Postoperatif ortalama takip süresi 12,08±5,02 (6-25) ay idi. Hastalarımızın ortalama yaşı 56,72±1,64 (13-87); donör kornea alınan hastaların yaş ortalaması ise 54,02±12,25 (16-81) yıl idi. Hastaların en çok sırasıyla greft yetmezliği (35 göz, %23,2), psödofakik büllöz keratopati (28 göz, %18,5) ve travmatik korneal skar (16 göz, %10,6) nedeni ile opere edildiği tespit edildi. On bir (%7,3) göze ekstrakapsüler katarakt ekstraksiyonu ve arka kamara göz içi lensi implantasyonu, 5 (%3,3) göze skleral fiksasyonlu göz içi lensi implantasyonu, 10 (%6,6) göze ön vitrektomi ve 3 (%2) göze ise sineşiotomi kombine cerrahileri uygulandı. Takip süresi sonunda hastaların %7,9 (12 göz)'unda greft yetmezliği saptandı. Hastalarımızın operasyon sonrası düzeltilmiş en iyi görme keskinliğindeki vizyon artışı istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu. Sonuç: Literatürdeki çoğu çalışmadan farklı olarak çalışmamızda en sık penetran keratoplasti endikasyonunun, greft yetmezliği olduğu saptanmıştır. Lamellar keratoplasti tekniklerinin uygulama sıklığında artış ile penetran keratoplasti endikasyonlarında değişimler gözlemlenmiştir. Ancak, gereken hastalarda penetran keratoplasti ameliyatlarına olan ihtiyaç hâlâ devam etmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Penetran keratoplasti; kornea; greft yetmezliği
Objective: To present the indications and clinical outcomes of our patients who underwent penetrating keratoplasty in our clinic. Material and Methods: The records of patients who underwent penetrating keratoplasty surgery between June 2014 and December 2015 were evaluated retrospectively. The age, gender, penetrating keratoplasty indications and operation type (keratoplasty or combined surgery), Best corrected visual acuity of preoperative and postoperative 1st month, 3rd month and final visual acuity of the recent examination (12 mounts), intraocular pressure changes and other postoperative findings evaluated. Results: 151 eyes of 151 patients were included in the study, 56 of them were female (37.1%) and 95 were male (62.9%). Postoperative mean follow-up period was 12.08±5.02 (6-25) months. The mean age of our patients was 56.72+/-1.64 (13-87) years. The mean age of the donor cornea was 54.02+/-12.25 (16-81). The patients mostlly operated for graft failure (35 eyes, 23.2%), pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (28 eyes, 18.5%) and traumatic corneal scar (16 eyes, 10.6%), respectively. In 11 (7.3%) eyes extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation, in five (3.3%) eyes scleral fixation intraocular lens implantation, in ten (6.6%) eyes anterior vitrectomy and in three (2%) eyes sinechotomy combined surgeries were performed. Graft failure was detected in 7.9% of the cases (12 eyes) at the end of the follow-up period. The increase in best corrected visual activity of our patients after the operation was found to be statistically significant. Conclusion: Unlike most studies in the literature, the most common indication for penetrating keratoplasty in our study was graft failure. Changes in the indications of penetrating keratoplasty have been observed because of the increased frequency of lamellar keratoplasty techniques. However, there is still a need for penetrating keratoplasty surgeries in required cases.
Keywords: Penetrating keratoplasty; cornea; graft failure
- Genc O, Bulut N, Ort A. [Indications for keratoplasty operation and operation techniques]. J Kartal TR. 2012;23(2):61-4. [Crossref]
- Nurozler AB, Yalniz Akkaya Z, Yildiz HE, Onat M, Budak K, Ornek F. [Penetrating keratoplasty indications and outcomes]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Opthalmol. 2009;18(2):85-91.
- Arentensen JJ. Corneal transplant allograft reaction: possible predisposing factors. Trans AM Ophthalmol Soc. 1983;81:361-402.
- Chow SP, Cook SD, Tole DM. Long-term outcomes of high-risk keratoplasty in patients receiving systemic immunosuppression. Cornea. 2015;34(11):1395-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Robin JB, Gindi JJ, Koh K, Schanzlin DJ, Rao NA, York KK, et al. An update of the indications for penetrating keratoplasty, 1979 through 1983. Arch Ophtalmol. 1986;104(1): 87-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Brady SE, Rapuano CJ, Arentsen JJ, Cohen EJ, Laibson PR. Clinical indications for and procedures associated with penetrating keratoplasty, 1983-1988. Am J Ophtalmol. 1989;108(2):118-22. [Crossref]
- Boimer C, Lee K, Sharpen L, Mashour RS, Slomovic AR. Evolving surgical techniques of and indications for corneal transplantation in Ontario from 2000 to 2009. Can J Ophthalmol. 2011;46(4):360-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Chien AM, Schmidt CM, Cohen EJ, Rajpal RK, Sperber LT, Rapuano CJ, et al. Glaucoma in the immediate postoperative period after penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115(6):711-4. [Crossref]
- Pahor D, Gracner B, Falez M, Gracner T. [Changing indications for penetrating keratoplasty over a 20-year period, 1985-2004]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2007;224(2):110-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- 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. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Mohamadi P, McDonnell JM, Irvine JA, McDonnell PJ, Rao N, Smith RE. Changing indications for penetrating keratoplasty, 1984-1988. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;107(5): 550-2. [Crossref]
- Liu E, Slomovic AR. Indications for penetrating keratoplasty in Canada, 1986-1995. Cornea. 1997;16(4):414-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Al-Yousuf N, Mavrikakis I, Mavrikakis E, Daya SM. Penetrating keratoplasty: indications over a 10 year period. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(8): 998-1001. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Frigo AC, Fasolo A, Capuzzo C, Fornea M, Bellucci R, Busin M, et al. Corneal transplantation activity over 7 years: changing trends for indications, patient demographics and surgical techniques from the Corneal Transplant Epidemiological Study (CORTES). Transplant Proc. 2015;47(2):528-35. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Anwar M, Teichmann KD. Big-bubble technique to bare Descemet's membrane in anterior lamellar keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28(3):398-403. [Crossref]
- Coombes AG, Kirwan JF, Rostron CK. Deep lamellar keratoplasty with lyophilised tissue in the management of keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85(7):788-91. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Melles GR, Remeijer L, Geerards AJ, Beekhuis WH. A quick surgical technique for deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty using visco-dissection. Cornea. 2000;19(4):427-32. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Waring GO 3rd, Kenyon KR, Gemmill MC. Results of anterior segment reconstruction for aphakic and pseudophakic corneal edema. Ophthalmology. 1988;95(6):836-41. [Crossref]
- Busin M, Arffa RC, McDonald MB, Kaufman HE. Combined penetrating keratoplasty, extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Ophthalmic Surg. 1987;18(4):272-5.
- Insler MS, Helm CJ, Kaufman HE. Visual results after keratoplasty in patients posterior chamber intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol. 1988;106(1):72-6. [Crossref]
- Tavakkoli H, Sugar J. Microbial keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty. Ophtalmic Surgery. 1994;25(6):356-60.
- KIoess PM, Stulting RD, Waring GO 3rd, Wilson LA. Bacterial and fungal endophthalmitis after penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115(3):309-16. [Crossref]
- Sternberg P Jr, Meredith TA, Stewart MA, Kaplan HJ. Retinal detachment in penetrating keratoplasty patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 1990;109(2):148-52. [Crossref]
- Boisjoly HM, Bernard PM, Dube I, Laughrea PA, Bazin R, Bernier J. Effect of factors unrelated to tissue matching on comeal transplant endothelial rejection. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;107(6):647-54. [Crossref]
- Boisjoly HM, Tourigny R, Bazin R, Laughrea PA, Dube I, Chamberland G, et al. Risk factors of corneal graft failure. Ophthalmology. 1993;100(11):1728-35. [Crossref]
- Irkec M. [Corneal immunology and graft disease]. Turacli ME, editor. Oft. Kursu (kornea cerrahisi) Bult. 1. Baski. Ankara: Oztek Ofset; 1986. p.119-23.
- Bishop VL, Robinson LP, Wechsler AW, Billson FA. Corneal graft survival: a retrospective Australian study. Aust N Z J Ophthalmology. 1986;14(2):133-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Price FW Jr, Whitson WE, Colins KS, Marks RG. Five year corneal graft survival. A large, single center patient cohort. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111(6):799-805. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Muraine M, Sanchez C, Watt L, Retout A, Brasseur G. Long-term results of penetrating keratoplasty. A 10-year-plus retrospective study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2003;241(7):571-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Williams KA, Lowe M, Bartlett C, Kelly TL, Coster DJ; All Contributors. Risk factors for human corneal graft failure within the Australian corneal graft registry. Transplantation. 2008;86(12):1720-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Beckingsale P, Mavrikakis I, Al-Yousuf N, Mavrikakis E, Daya SM. Penetrating keratoplasty: outcomes from a corneal unit compared to national data. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(6):728-31. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Thompson RW Jr, Price MO, Bowers PJ, Price FW Jr. Long-term graft survival after penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(7):1396-402. [Crossref]
- Serdarevic ON, Renard GJ, Pouliquen Y. Videokeratoscopy of recipient peripheral corneas in combined penetrating keratoplasty, cataract extraction, and lens implantation. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996;122(1):29-37. [Crossref]
.: Process List