The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Keratometric analysis of thin and ultrathin DSEK

Keratometric analysis of thin and ultrathin DSEK
Keratometric analysis of thin and ultrathin DSEK
Purpose: : Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty has been established as the treatment ofchoice in endothelial dysfunction. There remains a major controversy whether the difference between thinner and thicker grafts has a significant impact on visual outcome. Ouraim is to evaluate the influence of ultrathin and thin DSEK grafts on the optical performanceof the cornea post DSEK and determine whether there is a difference in the optical performance between thin and ultrathin graft lenticules Methods: : We studied two groups of patients one with regular donor thickness ( thin grafts131 µm or more) and one with ultrathin grafts (130 µm or less). All DSEK patients were assessed by means Pentacam HR rotating slit beam Scheimpflug imaging (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Graft thickness post-operatively was measured by Visante OCT. 34 eyes of 32 patients were included in the keratometric evaluation. Results: : Mean age of the patients was 72yr (range 36-90), Median 75yr. Minimum F/U- 4m - Mean 13.3 (range 4-22), Median 11.5m. Oculus Pentacam HR >130 μm LOA mean ± SD 0.67 ± 0.37 Range 0.34 -1.52 HOA mean ± SD 0.13 ± 0.06 Range 0.07 -0.26 TA mean± SD 0.67 ± 0.37 Range 0.31 - 1.54 Oculus Pentacam HR <130 μm LOA mean ± SD 0.60 ± 0.15 Range 0.38 - 0.99 HOA mean ± SD 0.141± 0.03 Range 0.09 - 0.16 TA mean ± SD 0.64 ± 0.15 Range 0.37 - 1.00Low order, high order and total aberrations measured at 8mm did not correlate with graft or corneal thickness. Conclusions: : No significant difference was found when BCVA was compared between ultrathingrafts (<130μm) and grafts >130μm. Only patients with ultrathin grafts achievedBCVA of 0.2 or better. No significant correlation existed between donor lenticule, host corneal and total corneal thickness with BCVA and corneal aberrations. No significant difference was found in low and high\ order aberrations of the two groups but the total aberrations were significantly different between the ultrathin and the thin DSEK group.
0146-0404
Tsatos, Michael
49820135-c443-4bb0-aa7c-f602ea3207af
Konstantopoulos, Aristides
c54185a9-1ef3-4b6d-91a3-38de444cc4fb
Hossain, Parwez
563de5fc-84ad-4539-9228-bde0237eaf51
Anderson, David F.
de3b2d61-3698-4c8f-adcf-604483666fda
Tsatos, Michael
49820135-c443-4bb0-aa7c-f602ea3207af
Konstantopoulos, Aristides
c54185a9-1ef3-4b6d-91a3-38de444cc4fb
Hossain, Parwez
563de5fc-84ad-4539-9228-bde0237eaf51
Anderson, David F.
de3b2d61-3698-4c8f-adcf-604483666fda

Tsatos, Michael, Konstantopoulos, Aristides, Hossain, Parwez and Anderson, David F. (2012) Keratometric analysis of thin and ultrathin DSEK. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 53 (14).

Record type: Meeting abstract

Abstract

Purpose: : Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty has been established as the treatment ofchoice in endothelial dysfunction. There remains a major controversy whether the difference between thinner and thicker grafts has a significant impact on visual outcome. Ouraim is to evaluate the influence of ultrathin and thin DSEK grafts on the optical performanceof the cornea post DSEK and determine whether there is a difference in the optical performance between thin and ultrathin graft lenticules Methods: : We studied two groups of patients one with regular donor thickness ( thin grafts131 µm or more) and one with ultrathin grafts (130 µm or less). All DSEK patients were assessed by means Pentacam HR rotating slit beam Scheimpflug imaging (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Graft thickness post-operatively was measured by Visante OCT. 34 eyes of 32 patients were included in the keratometric evaluation. Results: : Mean age of the patients was 72yr (range 36-90), Median 75yr. Minimum F/U- 4m - Mean 13.3 (range 4-22), Median 11.5m. Oculus Pentacam HR >130 μm LOA mean ± SD 0.67 ± 0.37 Range 0.34 -1.52 HOA mean ± SD 0.13 ± 0.06 Range 0.07 -0.26 TA mean± SD 0.67 ± 0.37 Range 0.31 - 1.54 Oculus Pentacam HR <130 μm LOA mean ± SD 0.60 ± 0.15 Range 0.38 - 0.99 HOA mean ± SD 0.141± 0.03 Range 0.09 - 0.16 TA mean ± SD 0.64 ± 0.15 Range 0.37 - 1.00Low order, high order and total aberrations measured at 8mm did not correlate with graft or corneal thickness. Conclusions: : No significant difference was found when BCVA was compared between ultrathingrafts (<130μm) and grafts >130μm. Only patients with ultrathin grafts achievedBCVA of 0.2 or better. No significant correlation existed between donor lenticule, host corneal and total corneal thickness with BCVA and corneal aberrations. No significant difference was found in low and high\ order aberrations of the two groups but the total aberrations were significantly different between the ultrathin and the thin DSEK group.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: March 2012

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 448117
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/448117
ISSN: 0146-0404
PURE UUID: 4adca458-4abf-47ac-aab3-9d854b1c0957
ORCID for Parwez Hossain: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-3131-2395

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Apr 2021 15:59
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:04

Export record

Contributors

Author: Michael Tsatos
Author: Aristides Konstantopoulos
Author: Parwez Hossain ORCID iD
Author: David F. Anderson

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×