International Ophthalmology

, Volume 39, Issue 9, pp 2083–2088 | Cite as

Correlation between age and corneal edema in pediatric patients with Peters anomaly

  • Carla J. Osigian
  • Mohamed S. Sayed
  • George Kontadakis
  • Michael Venincasa
  • Maria P. Fernandez
  • Kara M. Cavuoto
  • Ta C. Chang
  • Mohamed Abou ShoushaEmail author
Original Paper



To evaluate corneal edema in different-aged pediatric patients with Peters anomaly and to correlate in vivo with ex vivo histopathologic findings.


A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed. The medical records of patients diagnosed with Peters anomaly who underwent examination under anesthesia (EUA) between 2011 and 2015 were reviewed. Eyes in which central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements were taken were included. The thickest point in the CCT pachymetric map was used to objectively quantify corneal edema. Correlation between CCT and age was calculated. Additionally, a retrospective review of histopathologic studies of excised corneal buttons from pediatric eyes with Peters anomaly between 2011 and 2015 was performed.


Eighteen eyes of 12 children were included. Mean age was 14 ± 15 months, and mean CCT was 842 ± 304 µm. A significant inverse correlation was noted between the CCT and the age of the patients, with lower CCT values in older children (r = 0.6; P = 0.01). Seven excised corneal buttons that underwent penetrating keratoplasty were reviewed. All corneal buttons showed absence of Descemet membrane and localized absence of endothelium. However, three specimens showed presence of corneal endothelium in areas of absent or attenuated Descemet membrane.


In Peters anomaly, the CCT decreases with age, possibly due to a decrease in corneal edema. Histopathologic studies show cases of endothelial expansion in areas of absent or attenuated Descemet membrane. This may contribute to improved endothelial function and decreased edema with age.


Peters anomaly Descemet membrane Anterior segment coherence tomography Corneal endothelium 



This study was supported by a NEI K23 award (K23EY026118), NEI core center grant to the University of Miami (P30 EY014801), and Research to Prevent Blindness (RPB). The funding organization had no role in the design or conduct of this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

A retrospective chart review was performed and approved by the University of Miami Institutional Review Board. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

As this study was a retrospective chart review, a waiver of informed consent was deemed appropriate by the IRB.


  1. 1.
    Bhandari R, Ferri S, Whittaker B, Liu M, Lazzaro DR (2011) Peters anomaly: review of the literature. Cornea 30:939–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chang JW, Kim MK, Kim JH, Kim SJ, Wee WR, Yu YS (2013) Long-term visual outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty for Peters anomaly. Graefe’s archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle. Ophthalmologie 251:953–958Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van den Bogerd B, Dhubhghaill SN, Koppen C, Tassignon MJ, Zakaria N (2018) A review of the evidence for in vivo corneal endothelial regeneration. Surv Ophthalmol 63:149–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hong J, Yang Y, Cursiefen C, Mashaghi A, Wu D, Liu Z et al (2017) Optimising keratoplasty for Peters’ anomaly in infants using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Br J Ophthalmol 101:820–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beck ACT, Freedman S (2013) Section 1: Definition, classification, differential diagnosis. In: Weinreb RN, Grajewski A, Papadopoulos M, Grigg J Freedman S (eds) World Glaucoma Association Consensus Series—9: childhood glaucoma. Kugler Publications, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 3–10Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eye Pediatric (2011) Disease investigator G. Central corneal thickness in children. Arch Ophthalmol 129:1132–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hussein MA, Paysse EA, Bell NP, Coats DK, Brady McCreery KM, Koch DD et al (2004) Corneal thickness in children. Am J Ophthalmol 138:744–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dai E, Gunderson CA (2006) Pediatric central corneal thickness variation among major ethnic populations. J AAPOS Off Publ Am Assoc Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 10:22–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zheng Y, Huang G, Huang W, He M (2008) Distribution of central and peripheral corneal thickness in Chinese children and adults: the Guangzhou twin eye study. Cornea 27:776–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laing RA, Neubauer L, Oak SS, Kayne HL, Leibowitz HM (1984) Evidence for mitosis in the adult corneal endothelium. Ophthalmology 91:1129–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Borkar DS, Veldman P, Colby KA (2016) Treatment of fuchs endothelial dystrophy by descemet stripping without endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 35:1267–1273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koenig SB (2013) Long-term corneal clarity after spontaneous repair of an iatrogenic descemetorhexis in a patient with Fuchs dystrophy. Cornea 32:886–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shah RD, Randleman JB, Grossniklaus HE (2012) Spontaneous corneal clearing after Descemet’s stripping without endothelial replacement. Ophthalmology 119:256–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kenyon KR (1975) Mesenchymal dysgenesis in Peter’s anomaly, sclerocornea and congenital endothelial dystrophy. Exp Eye Res 21:125–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Buzzonetti L, Ardia R, Petroni S, Petrocelli G, Valente P, Parrilla R et al (2016) Four years of corneal keratoplasty in Italian paediatric patients: indications and clinical outcomes. Graefe’s archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle. Ophthalmologie 254:2239–2245Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye InstituteUniversity of Miami Miller School of MedicineMiamiUSA
  2. 2.University of Miami Miller School of MedicineMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations