预载与外科医生制备的DSAEK的原发性移植物失败:临床和离体相关性研究。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Kamran M Riaz, Karanpreet S Multani, Liam Redden, Osamah Mian, Michael Szkarlat, Kai Ding, Jessica Ludwig, Onkar Sawant, Shahzad Mian
{"title":"预载与外科医生制备的DSAEK的原发性移植物失败:临床和离体相关性研究。","authors":"Kamran M Riaz, Karanpreet S Multani, Liam Redden, Osamah Mian, Michael Szkarlat, Kai Ding, Jessica Ludwig, Onkar Sawant, Shahzad Mian","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate whether primary graft failure (PGF) rates and endothelial cell loss (ECL) differ between surgeon-trephined/loaded and eye bank-preloaded Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) grafts.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary care academic center.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case series and ex vivo laboratory study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single-center review of 69 eyes undergoing DSAEK (2020-2023) divided into three groups based on graft preparation and eye bank source: A) eye bank-preloaded in EndoSerter (PL-ES), B) eye bank-preloaded in glass tube (PL-GT), and C) surgeon-trephined/loaded in EndoSerter (SL-ES). The primary clinical outcome was PGF (persistent corneal edema >3 months despite medical therapy). Secondary outcomes included visual outcomes and clinical complications (cystoid macular edema (CME) and rebubbling rate (RR)). The primary outcome of the laboratory study was percentage ECL (%ECL).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All lenticules were ≤80 µm. PGF was significantly higher in the PL-ES group (8/20; 40%) and PL-GT group (4/7; 57%) compared to the SL-ES group (1/42; 2%) (p < 0.0001). Grafts requiring rebubbling were more likely to experience PGF (p = 0.0176). PGF eyes were regrafted with SL-ES DSAEK; none experienced subsequent PGF. There were no significant differences in CME, RR, corrected distance visual acuity, and spherical equivalent. The ex vivo study included 9 PL-ES, 6 PL-GT, and 6 SL-ES grafts. %ECL was higher in both preloaded groups than SL-ES (p = 0.0354), though significance was not demonstrated on post-hoc analysis. Fluorescent imaging revealed more cell loss in preloaded grafts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preloading and storage of DSAEK grafts may impact PGF rates clinically and ECL ex vivo.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primary graft failure in preloaded versus surgeon prepared DSAEK: a clinical and ex vivo correlation study.\",\"authors\":\"Kamran M Riaz, Karanpreet S Multani, Liam Redden, Osamah Mian, Michael Szkarlat, Kai Ding, Jessica Ludwig, Onkar Sawant, Shahzad Mian\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001785\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate whether primary graft failure (PGF) rates and endothelial cell loss (ECL) differ between surgeon-trephined/loaded and eye bank-preloaded Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) grafts.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary care academic center.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case series and ex vivo laboratory study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single-center review of 69 eyes undergoing DSAEK (2020-2023) divided into three groups based on graft preparation and eye bank source: A) eye bank-preloaded in EndoSerter (PL-ES), B) eye bank-preloaded in glass tube (PL-GT), and C) surgeon-trephined/loaded in EndoSerter (SL-ES). The primary clinical outcome was PGF (persistent corneal edema >3 months despite medical therapy). Secondary outcomes included visual outcomes and clinical complications (cystoid macular edema (CME) and rebubbling rate (RR)). The primary outcome of the laboratory study was percentage ECL (%ECL).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All lenticules were ≤80 µm. PGF was significantly higher in the PL-ES group (8/20; 40%) and PL-GT group (4/7; 57%) compared to the SL-ES group (1/42; 2%) (p < 0.0001). Grafts requiring rebubbling were more likely to experience PGF (p = 0.0176). PGF eyes were regrafted with SL-ES DSAEK; none experienced subsequent PGF. There were no significant differences in CME, RR, corrected distance visual acuity, and spherical equivalent. The ex vivo study included 9 PL-ES, 6 PL-GT, and 6 SL-ES grafts. %ECL was higher in both preloaded groups than SL-ES (p = 0.0354), though significance was not demonstrated on post-hoc analysis. Fluorescent imaging revealed more cell loss in preloaded grafts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preloading and storage of DSAEK grafts may impact PGF rates clinically and ECL ex vivo.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001785\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001785","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估手术-环钻/加载和眼库-预加载Descemet剥离自动内皮角膜移植术(DSAEK)之间的原发性移植物失败率(PGF)和内皮细胞损失(ECL)是否存在差异。环境:三级医疗学术中心。设计:回顾性病例系列和离体实验室研究。方法:对2020-2023年接受DSAEK手术的69只眼进行单中心评价,根据移植准备和眼库来源分为3组:A)眼库预载于EndoSerter (PL-ES), B)眼库预载于玻璃管(PL-GT), C)手术-环钻/内载于EndoSerter (SL-ES)。主要临床结果为PGF(持续角膜水肿bbb3个月,尽管药物治疗)。次要结果包括视力结果和临床并发症(黄斑囊样水肿(CME)和再泡率(RR))。实验室研究的主要终点是ECL百分比(%ECL)。结果:所有透镜体均≤80µm。PL-ES组PGF(8/20; 40%)和PL-GT组PGF(4/7; 57%)明显高于SL-ES组(1/42;2%)(p < 0.0001)。需要再泡的移植物更容易发生PGF (p = 0.0176)。用SL-ES DSAEK移植PGF眼;没有人经历过随后的PGF。两组的CME、RR、矫正距离视力和球面等效性无显著差异。离体研究包括9例PL-ES、6例PL-GT和6例SL-ES移植物。两个预加载组的%ECL均高于SL-ES组(p = 0.0354),但事后分析没有证明这一点。荧光成像显示,预载移植物的细胞损失更多。结论:DSAEK移植物的预加载和储存可能影响临床和体外ECL的PGF率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Primary graft failure in preloaded versus surgeon prepared DSAEK: a clinical and ex vivo correlation study.

Purpose: To evaluate whether primary graft failure (PGF) rates and endothelial cell loss (ECL) differ between surgeon-trephined/loaded and eye bank-preloaded Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) grafts.

Setting: Tertiary care academic center.

Design: Retrospective case series and ex vivo laboratory study.

Methods: Single-center review of 69 eyes undergoing DSAEK (2020-2023) divided into three groups based on graft preparation and eye bank source: A) eye bank-preloaded in EndoSerter (PL-ES), B) eye bank-preloaded in glass tube (PL-GT), and C) surgeon-trephined/loaded in EndoSerter (SL-ES). The primary clinical outcome was PGF (persistent corneal edema >3 months despite medical therapy). Secondary outcomes included visual outcomes and clinical complications (cystoid macular edema (CME) and rebubbling rate (RR)). The primary outcome of the laboratory study was percentage ECL (%ECL).

Results: All lenticules were ≤80 µm. PGF was significantly higher in the PL-ES group (8/20; 40%) and PL-GT group (4/7; 57%) compared to the SL-ES group (1/42; 2%) (p < 0.0001). Grafts requiring rebubbling were more likely to experience PGF (p = 0.0176). PGF eyes were regrafted with SL-ES DSAEK; none experienced subsequent PGF. There were no significant differences in CME, RR, corrected distance visual acuity, and spherical equivalent. The ex vivo study included 9 PL-ES, 6 PL-GT, and 6 SL-ES grafts. %ECL was higher in both preloaded groups than SL-ES (p = 0.0354), though significance was not demonstrated on post-hoc analysis. Fluorescent imaging revealed more cell loss in preloaded grafts.

Conclusions: Preloading and storage of DSAEK grafts may impact PGF rates clinically and ECL ex vivo.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
259
审稿时长
8.5 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信