Functional outcome of repeat Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) for corneal decompensation following graft failure after primary DMEK

Trends and Surgeon Variations in Early Regrafts After Endothelial Keratoplasty: Analysis of the National Medicare Data Set

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to determine national-level trends in early regraft rates and examine patient-level and surgeon-level characteristics associated with early regrafts.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, cohort study. We identified beneficiaries aged 65 years or older in the 2011 to 2020 Medicare carrier claims data set who underwent Endothelial keratoplasty (EK) and subsequently underwent an early regraft. The incidence of early regraft for each year was calculated and patient-level and surgeon-level characteristics associated with regrafts were examined using a multivariable regression model.

RESULTS

Of 114,383 EK procedures, 4119 (3.60%) were followed by an early regraft, with no significant variations in the rates between years ( P = 0.59). Factors associated with higher odds of early regraft were Black compared with White race (OR 1.151; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.018-1.302) and the highest quartile of income versus the lowest quartile (OR 1.120; 95% CI 1.002-1.252). Factors associated with lower odds were female sex (OR 0.889; 95% CI 0.840-0.942), receiving surgery in a hospital-based outpatient department versus an ambulatory center (OR 0.813; 95% CI 0.740-0.894), and having a surgeon with the highest quartile of annual EK volume versus the lowest (OR 0.726; 95% CI 0.545-0.967). Early regraft rates among surgeons ranged from 0% to 58.8% with a median [interquartile range] of 3.13 [0-6.15].

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant increases in the early regraft rates over the past decade in the United States. Patient male sex and Black race, ambulatory surgery center-based location of the surgery, and low surgeon EK volume were associated with early regrafts. Substantial surgeon variability in regraft rates may indicate opportunities for improvement through development of best practices on perioperative management and patient counseling.

Etiology-Specific Comparison of the Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Repeat Deep Anterior Lamellar Keratoplasty for Optical Indications

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the etiology-specific clinical outcomes and complications of repeat deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) after failed DALK.

METHODS

This retrospective case study included 32 eyes of 27 patients who underwent repeat DALK of 450 cases of DALK performed for optical indications between 1997 and 2013. The patients were divided into 4 etiology-specific subgroups (the corneal dystrophy, ocular surface disease, stromal scar, and others) or those with or without limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD). The clinical outcomes evaluated were graft survival, best-corrected visual acuity, endothelial cell density, and complications.

RESULTS

The mean postoperative follow-up duration was 69.6 ± 54.8 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall graft survival rate were 76.7%, 57.5%, and 38.8% respectively. The graft survival rate was the highest in the corneal dystrophy group ( P = 0.0014) and was significantly ( P = 0.0010) higher in eyes without LSCD than in eyes with LSCD. There were no significant differences in the graft survival rates between the previous and current DALK groups. The postoperative best-corrected visual acuity of all subjects improved significantly. The postoperative endothelial cell density did not decrease after repeat DALK. There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications between patients with and without LSCD, except the incidence of persistent epithelial defects.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat DALK had favorable outcomes in all etiology-specific groups, whereas eyes with LSCD required careful assessment of the ocular surface to avoid graft failure due to persistent epithelial defects.

Risk Factors for Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Rejection: Current Perspectives- Systematic Review

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is a corneal endothelial transplantation procedure with selective removal of a patient's defective Descemet membrane and endothelium. It is replaced with a healthy donor Descemet membrane and endothelium without a stromal component. Corneal graft rejection can be at the level of epithelium, stroma as well endothelium. DMEK graft rejection is relatively less common than rejection with DSAEK or penetrating keratoplasty, and a good outcome may be achieved with prompt management. The clinical picture of DMEK rejection is usually similar to endothelial rejection in Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSEK/DSAEK), which generally manifests as pain, redness, reduction in visual acuity, stromal edema, endothelial rejection line, keratic precipitates at the back of the cornea and corneal neovascularization. However, more subtle forms of rejection or immune reactions are more common in DMEK compared to DSAEK eyes. Early clinical diagnosis, prompt intervention, and meticulous management safeguard visual acuity and graft survival in these cases. Intensive topical steroids form the mainstay in the management of DMEK rejection. Sometimes, oral or intravenous steroids or other systemic immunomodulators may be required. DMEK graft failure can be primary or secondary, and failure usually requires a second procedure in the form of repeat DMEK or DSEK or penetrating keratoplasty (PKP). A detailed literature search was performed using search engines such as Google Scholar, PubMed, and Google books, and a comprehensive review on DMEK rejection was found to be lacking. This review is a comprehensive update on the risk factors, pathophysiology, primary and secondary graft failure, recent advances in diagnosis, prevention of rejection, and updates in the management of DMEK rejection. The review also discusses the differential diagnosis of DMEK failure and rejection, prognosis, and future perspectives considering DMEK failure and rejection.

The Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) "Wave Maneuver"

A novel technique for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) graft handling and centration without the endothelium touching the posterior part of the anterior chamber (AC), is presented here. It is particularly suitable for vitrectomized eyes, deep AC, and AC intraocular lenses (ACIOLs), potentially reducing surgery time and endothelial cell loss during surgery. This retrospective interventional case series includes 27 eyes with complex ocular pathology. All utilized a “Wave maneuver” to center an early elevated graft without completing graft centration on the bottom of the AC. Successful graft attachment and centration were evaluated intra and post-operatively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and donor endothelial cell density (ECD) were measured pre-operatively, and three and six months post-operatively. DMEK grafts were successfully attached and centered in all cases. No maneuver-related complications were observed intraoperatively. BCVA improved from a pre-operative 0.2 ± 0.63, to 0.43 ± 0.49 and 0.76 ± 0.51 at the three- and six-month follow-ups, respectively (p < 0.01). CCT decreased from a pre-operative 742 ± 118, to 546 ± 87 and 512 ± 67 at three and six months, respectively (p < 0.01). ECD decreased from 2878 ± 419 cells/mm2 to 1153 ± 466 cells/mm2 at three and six months, respectively (p < 0.01). The “Wave maneuver” may be very beneficial in DMEK cases where the AC is either very deep or the bottom of the AC is compromised. The “Wave maneuver” learning curve was brief.

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.

Risk Factors for Repeat Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Graft Failure

PURPOSE

To evaluate repeat Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (re-DMEK) success rates and to identify risk factors for re-DMEK failure.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Settings: Institutional.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

A chart review was performed, including all eyes with primary DMEK failure that underwent re-DMEK between 2013 and 2019 at the Toronto Western Hospital and the Kensington Eye Institute (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) and had at least 6 months of follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Predicting factors for re-DMEK outcome.

RESULTS

Of 590 consecutive DMEK surgeries, 40 eyes (6.7%) were identified for having a secondary DMEK surgery after primary DMEK failure. Etiologies for primary DMEK were Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (32.5%), pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (35%), previous failed graft (27.5%), and other indications (5%). Fifty-five percent of the cohort were categorized as having a complicated anterior segment including 11 eyes with previous glaucoma surgery, 7 eyes post-penetrating keratoplasty, 4 eyes post-Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty, 3 eyes peripheral anterior synechia, 3 eyes previous pars plana vitrectomy, 2 eyes aphakia, and 1 eye each with aniridia, anterior chamber intraocular lens, and iris-fixated intraocular lens. Re-DMEK failure was documented in 12 eyes (30%) of the entire cohort. The risk factor for re-DMEK failure was the presence of a complicated anterior segment (P = .01, odds ratio = 17.0 [95% confidence interval: 1.92-150.85]), with 50% re-DMEK failure rate in this subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Re-DMEK is a viable option for cases of primary DMEK failure, especially for eyes with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy as the indication for primary DMEK without other ocular morbidities; however, eyes categorized with a complicated anterior segment had high re-DMEK failure rates.</ABSTRACT>.

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.

Repeat Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty for Failed Primary Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty at a Referral Center for Keratoplasty in Spain: DIMOEK Study

PURPOSE

To analyze the clinical results of repeat Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (re-DMEK) for failed primary DMEK graft at a referral center for keratoplasty in Spain.

DESIGN

Retrospective, interventional, comparative case series.

METHODS

From a single-center, single-surgeon series of 189 consecutive DMEK surgeries, 14 (7.41%) were re-DMEK eyes. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity change (ΔBCVA, logarithm of minimal angle of resolution [logMAR]) from baseline (before first DMEK) to last follow-up. Secondary outcomes were ΔBCVA from baseline at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, endothelial cell loss (%ECL), rebubbling rate, and re-DMEK graft failure. Outcomes were compared with an age-matched control group of 18 successful primary DMEK eyes.

RESULTS

After re-DMEK (median follow-up time 14.5 [42.5] months), mean BCVA improved from 0.55 (0.42) logMAR (Snellen 20/71 [20/53]) at baseline to 0.09 (0.26) logMAR (Snellen 20/25 [20/36]; P = .037). ΔBCVA from baseline was statistically significant at months 3 (P = .028), 6 (P = .023), and 12 (P = .012), and ΔBCVA was significant observed between months 6 and 12 (P = .028). BCVA differences between patient groups were statistically nonsignificant at 3 (P = .397), 6 (P = .468), and 12 months (P = .647). Mean %ECL in re-DMEK eyes with follow-up ≥12 months was 48.2 (15.1%), and the rebubbling rate was 28.6%; differences between groups were statistically nonsignificant for both variables (P = .580 and P = .669, respectively). Three re-DMEK eyes developed graft failure, all achieving final BCVA ≤0.30 logMAR (Snellen ≥20/40) after tertiary keratoplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat DMEK produces significant, continuous visual improvement after failed primary DMEK. Although visual outcomes and %ECL were comparable to primary DMEK, there was a relatively high rate of graft failure after re-DMEK.