'Posture-Less' DMEK: Is Posturing After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Actually Necessary?

Analysis of Graft Detachments and Re-Bubblings After 450 Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Procedures

PURPOSE

To objectify the indication for re-bubbling by analyzing graft detachments (GDs) after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty.

METHODS

In this retrospective monocentric observational study, re-bubbling cases of 450 Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasties and the percentage of the residual gas filling (RGF) in the anterior chamber on the first postoperative day were collected. The number/location/extent of GDs and the corneal thickness above GDs were analyzed using anterior segment optical coherence tomography.

RESULTS

From a total of 450 grafts, 384 (85.3%) had at least a minimal degree GD. One hundred twenty-two of 450 grafts (27.1%) underwent at least 1 re-bubbling. The mean RGF was significantly lower in eyes with GD (67.7 ± 12.6%) than in eyes without GD (74.2 ± 11.3%). GDs occurred most frequently in the inferotemporal quadrant (46.0%). GDs were significantly more likely to require a re-bubbling when the central parts of the graft were affected (94.0% vs. 35.7%). The number of detachments per graft was directly proportional to the re-bubbling rate. The GDs which required a re-bubbling were on average 56 μm higher and 461 μm wider than the untreated ones. The cornea above the GDs that needed a re-bubbling was significantly thicker than above the untreated GDs (mean 988 ± 102 μm vs. 951 ± 99 μm).

CONCLUSIONS

The RGF seems to be a major influencing factor for graft attachment. The most susceptible location of the GD is inferotemporal. The main factors that need to be investigated to decide if a re-bubbling is required are the number of detachments per graft, their dimensions, whether the central portions of the graft are involved, and the corneal thickness above GDs.

Evaluating the forces involved in bubble management in DMEK surgery: mathematical and computational model with clinical implications

PURPOSE

To model postoperative forces involved in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) tissue adherence and bubble management, including the impact of surface tension on graft support, with a view towards clinical applications.

SETTING

Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Glasgow, and James Watt School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

DESIGN

Mathematical modelling and computer simulation.

METHODS

Theoretical modelling of biphasic flow and interaction of gas, liquid and tissue within the anterior chamber for static horizontal scenario A (adherent DMEK with mobile bubble) and dynamic vertical scenario B (release of bubble due to pupil block following DMEK).

RESULTS

The model assumed incompressibility for both fluids within realistically achievable pressure ranges. Cahn-Hilliard Navier-Stokes equations were discretised through the application of the Finite Element Method. Mathematical modelling and computer simulation showed bubble size, corneal curvature and force intensity influences surface tension support for DMEK tissue in scenario A. Scenario B demonstrated complex, uneven distribution of surface pressure on the DMEK graft during uncontrolled bubble release. Uneven pressure concentration can cause local tissue warping, with air/fluid displacement via capillary waves generated on the fluid-air interface adversely impacting DMEK support.

CONCLUSIONS

We have quantitatively and qualitatively modelled the forces involved in DMEK adherence in normal circumstances. We have shown releasing air/gas can abruptly reduce DMEK tissue support via generation of large pressure gradients at the liquid/bubble/graft interfaces, creating negative local forces. Surgeons should consider these principles to reduce DMEK graft dislocation rates via optimised bubble size to graft size, longer acting bubble support and avoiding rapid decompression where possible.

Safety and clinical outcomes of omitting same and next day review after DMEK performed with an inferior peripheral iridotomy

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of day one postoperative complications after Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) performed with intraoperative inferior peripheral iridotomy (PI), and whether their early detection influences postoperative intervention.

SUBJECTS/METHODS

70 eyes of 70 consecutive patients that underwent DMEK from August 2019 to August 2021 at a single UK centre were retrospectively analysed. Cases that did not have an inferior PI were excluded. Any action taken at day one and week one postoperative review was noted.

RESULTS

No pupil block or other major adverse events were found at day one review. At one week, 14 eyes (20%) required re-bubbling, all of which had been fully attached at the day one review.

CONCLUSIONS

This series suggests that inferior PI performed alongside DMEK alone or triple DMEK effectively minimizes the risk of pupil block. Since no early complications occurred in this cohort requiring immediate intervention, it may be safe to defer review of these patients to a later time point.

Clinical Outcomes of Descemet's Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty without Routine Prophylactic Peripheral Iridotomy

Objectives: To analyze the outcomes and complications of Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) performed without prophylactic peripheral iridotomy (PI). Methods: Design: Retrospective study.

SETTING

Institutional, tertiary care eye hospital.

STUDY POPULATION

All patients who underwent DMEK or DMEK combined with phacoemulsification (DMEK triple) for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, using a standardized protocol between August 2016 and July 2021, were included. Previous glaucoma surgery, laser PI, aphakia, or complicated pseudophakia were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes: Incidence of pupillary block (PB).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Graft detachment (GD), rebubbling rates, uncorrected (UCDVA) and best corrected logMAR distance visual acuity (BCDVA), and endothelial cell loss (ECL) at six months. Data were analyzed using the chi-square test and stepwise backward regression analysis. Results: 104 eyes of 72 patients were included. Four eyes (3.8%) developed PB; in two of these cases, standard protocol was not followed. Overall minor GD occurred in 43.2% (n = 45); significant GD was present only in 7 eyes (6.6%). Overall slit lamp rebubbling rate was 30% (n = 35), though only four patients were rebubbled in theatre (3.8%). PB, GD, and rebubbling rates did not vary with the surgeon, surgery, or tamponade (air or SF6 gas). UCDVA, BCDVA, and ECL at 6 months were 0.29 ± 0.31, 0.20 ± 0.28, and 40.46 ± 20.36%, respectively. Conclusions: Compared to previously reported outcomes of DMEK with PI, our results of PI less DMEK using a standardized protocol have a similar incidence of pupillary block, graft detachment, and rebubbling, with comparable visual acuity and endothelial cell loss.