Corneal Densitometry After Secondary Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty

Scheimpflug Corneal Densitometry Patterns at the Graft-Host Interface in DMEK and DSAEK: A 12-Month Longitudinal Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

To compare corneal densitometry (CD) patterns at the graft-host interface between Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK). Corneal densitometry is a quantitative assessment that objectively evaluates corneal clarity and optical quality by measuring the light backscatter from the cornea.

METHODS

Fifty-one eyes that received DMEK or DSAEK surgery for corneal endothelium dysfunction were evaluated. The primary endpoint included CD patterns at the graft-host interface, which were assessed by the Pentacam HR device at the center point of the corneal horizontal meridian (CDcentral), and at six points on the central circumference of the cornea (with a total diameter of 4 mm) (CDI,II,III,IV,V,VI). Secondary endpoints included the best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and graft thickness (GT). All of the evaluations were performed at follow-up appointments one, three, six and twelve months after the procedure.

RESULTS

DMEK showed a significant overall CD reduction of -7.9 ± 8.5 grayscale unit (GSU) compared to DSAEK (p < 0.001). In addition, the DMEK group showed significantly lower CDCentral,I,II,III,IV,V,VI values at follow-up appointments one, three, six and twelve months after the procedure compared to the DSAEK group (p < 0.001). BCDVA, CCT and GT were in favor of the DMEK group with a mean value of 0.39 ± 0.35 LogMar, 552.2 ± 71.1 µm and 11.03 ± 1.4 µm, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CD patterns at the graft-host interface seem to be different depending on the endothelial keratoplasty procedure. This provides specific insight into CD changes in this critical region of surgery, which may provide a better understanding of the postoperative evolution of these patients.

Distribution of 50-layer corneal densitometry values and related factors

PURPOSE

To investigate the distribution of 50 layers of corneal densitometry and related factors.

METHODS

Clinical data, including age, sex, central corneal thickness, corneal keratometry, and diopters, were collected from 102 healthy participants (102 eyes) in this retrospective study. The cornea was divided into 50 layers, and densitometry of each layer at 19 points was measured by the Pentacam. The value versus the depth curve was plotted. Paired-sample t test and one-way analysis of variance were used to compare densitometry in different regions or depth. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05.

RESULTS

The densitometry values of the Bowman membrane (10-14% depth), anterior stroma (14-30% depth), epithelium (0-10% depth), and Descemet membrane (94-98% depth) decreased sequentially, and the densitometry values of the middle and posterior stroma (30-94% depth) and endothelium (98-100% depth) were the lowest. The higher the degree of astigmatism, the higher the second densitometry peak (R = 0.277, P < .001). The densitometry values of the vertex and superior parts of the cornea were higher than those in the periphery and inferior parts, respectively (all P < .001). In the Bowman membrane, the densitometry is lowest in the inferior nasal part, while in the Descemet membrane, it is lowest in the inferior temporal part.

CONCLUSION

Two densitometry peaks appeared near the Bowman membrane and Descemet membrane. For different depths, the distribution of densitometry within a layer is different. We provide a methodological reference and data basis for corneal research based on local changes in densitometry, and help understand the details of corneal structure from an optical perspective through detailed layering and zoning analysis of densitometry.

3D Visualization System in Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK): A Six-Month Comparison with Conventional Microscope

Background: To compare the efficacy and safety of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) surgery using the three-dimensional (3D) display system NGENUITY to DMEK surgery performed with the traditional microscope (TM) in patients affected by Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Disease (FECD). Methods: Retrospective comparative study of 40 pseudophakic eyes of 40 patients affected by FECD who underwent DMEK surgery. Twenty patients (3D group) were operated on using the 3D display system and 20 patients (TM group) were operated on using the traditional microscope. Best spectacle corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell density (ECD) and corneal densitometry (CD) values were documented before and at 1, 3 and 6 months after DMEK. Intra- and postoperative complications were recorded. Results: The baseline assessments did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05). Global surgical time and time to perform descemetorhexis were significantly lower in the TM group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively). BSCVA, CCT, ECD and CD values did not differ significantly in the two groups at all follow-ups (p > 0.05). Complication rate was similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Three-dimensional display systems can be securely employed in DMEK surgery considering the satisfactory clinical outcomes, including Scheimpflug CD. Nevertheless, the slightly longer surgical time of the 3D DMEKs may lead to surgeons’ hesitancy. The main advantages of the heads-up approach may be the improved ergonomic comfort during surgery and the utility of assistants in surgical training.

Graft Failure after PKP and DMEK: What is the Best Option?

Corneal transplantation is the most commonly performed human tissue transplantation procedure worldwide. Due to the large number of grafts, corneal graft failure has become one of the most common indications for corneal transplantation for immunological and non-immunological reasons (e.g. recurrence of underlying disease, high intraocular pressure, grafted guttae, transmitted HSV or CMV infection). The relatively recently developed lamellar grafting techniques have introduced certain potential complications that may lead to graft failure and require approaches other than penetrating keratoplasty for re-grafting. On the other hand, these new lamellar techniques also offer new possibilities for salvaging failed penetrating grafts, with potential advantages over successive penetrating keratoplasties, such as lower intraoperative risks, faster visual rehabilitation and reduced risk of immune reaction. Today, the patient with good healing who is satisfied with his graft before endothelial decompensation, with low astigmatism and no stromal scars, represents the optimal condition for DMEK after PKP. This can also be combined with phacoemulsification (so-called triple DMEK). Otherwise, a penetrating re-keratoplasty with a larger graft (typically excimer laser repeat PKP 8.5/8.6 mm) is performed to treat edema, scars and irregular astigmatism simultaneously. The medical history carries weight in this decision! Re-DMEK in case of graft failure after DMEK and DSAEK does not require any modification of the standard technique and leads to good visual acuity results if performed quickly. If there is clear stromal scarring after multiple (external) DMEKs, PKP can also be considered to rectify the situation. Otherwise causeless recurrent graft failures must suggest herpetic or CMV endotheliitis and, after PCR analysis of the aqueous humour aspirate, be treated appropriately with medication.

Secondary Endothelial Keratoplasty-A Narrative Review of the Outcomes of Secondary Corneal Endothelial Allografts

BACKGROUND

We review the literature on the efficacy and safety outcomes of secondary Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).

METHODS

Literature search of English-written publications up to September 27, 2020 in PubMed database, using the terms "endothelial keratoplasty" in combination with keywords "secondary" or "repeat." In addition, we manually searched the references of the primary articles.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies (n = 651 eyes) were retained and reviewed, including 10 studies on repeat DSEK, 8 studies on repeat DMEK, 6 studies of DMEK following DSEK, and 3 studies of DSEK after failed DMEK. All studies reported significant improvement in visual acuity after secondary endothelial keratoplasty (EK). Twelve studies compared visual outcomes between primary and secondary EK, reporting conflicting findings. Sixteen studies reported endothelial cell loss rates after secondary EK, and only 1 study reported significantly increased endothelial cell loss rates compared with primary EK. Allograft rejection episodes occurred in 1.8% of eyes (range, 0%-50%). Six studies compared complication rates between primary and secondary EK eyes, and only 1 study found a higher median number of complications. However, 2 studies reported higher regraft failure rates compared with primary EK eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary EK is surgically feasible and renders significant visual improvement after failed primary EK, although it is not clear whether visual outcomes and allograft survival are comparable with primary EK, raising the question of whether secondary EK eyes are "low risk" as primary EK eyes. Further larger, prospective studies are encouraged to obtain additional quality data on secondary corneal endothelial allotransplantation.

Region of Interest Densitometry Analysis of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Dehiscence on Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography

Purpose

To evaluate a region of interest (ROI) method of analyzing anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) corneal densitometry (CD) in the setting of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) dehiscence.

Methods

Retrospective chart review of eyes that underwent (1) DMEK for Fuchs dystrophy (2) between 2018 to 2020 with (3) a partial DMEK dehiscence on AS-OCT, (4) involvement of only one side of the graft, (5) high-quality corneal AS-OCT scan, and (6) location of dehiscence within the central 5.5 mm of the cornea. Image analysis of the ROIs with ImageJ compared the total edematous area, mean stromal CD, and ratio of anterior-to-posterior (A/P) stromal CD for regions of DMEK dehiscence compared to the contralateral side with an attached DMEK graft. Control regions (with no dehiscence) and postdehiscence resolution images were also analyzed.

Results

Seventy sectors of the 21 images from 21 eyes with DMEK dehiscence were included. Compared to the contralateral side, regions of DMEK dehiscence had larger total areas (P < 0.0001), lower mean stromal CD (P = 0.0003), and higher A/P stromal CD (P < 0.0001). All control regions and postdehiscence resolution images did not show any significant differences compared to the contralateral sides.

Conclusions

This technique to analyze multiple ROIs on AS-OCT can be useful to evaluate CD of specific regions of corneal pathology. Lower mean stromal CD and higher A/P stromal CD may specify corneal edema.

Translational Relevance

Analyzing CD via multiple specific ROIs may be more suitable than measuring the CD of the full cornea and has broader applications extending to other corneal pathologies.

Corneal transplantation after failed grafts: Options and outcomes

Corneal transplantation is the most commonly performed human tissue transplantation procedure worldwide. Because of the large number of transplants, corneal graft failure has become one of the most common indications for corneal transplantation. The relatively recently developed lamellar transplant techniques have brought about specific potential complications leading to graft failure that may require different approaches to repeat transplantation other than penetrating keratoplasty. On the other hand, these new lamellar techniques also provide novel ways of rescuing failed penetrating grafts, with potential advantages over successive penetrating keratoplasties, such as reduced intraoperative risks and faster visual rehabilitation. We summarize the incidence and risk factors of graft failure for penetrating and lamellar (stromal and endothelial) corneal transplants and discuss the various surgical alternatives currently available to rescue such failed grafts, with a focus on the reported outcomes and limitations.