Advertisement

Ultrathin DSAEK

  • Yoav Nahum
  • Massimo Busin
Chapter

Abstract

In the course of the last few years, Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) has established itself as the surgical treatment of choice for endothelial decompensation and is now the most popular type of keratoplasty performed in the USA [1–11]. Its advantages over penetrating keratoplasty (PK) includes the avoidance of opening the globe, the minimization of postoperative refractive error, and the short time required for wound healing, thus allowing complete suture removal as early as few weeks postoperatively.

Keywords

Central Corneal Thickness Penetrate Keratoplasty Deep Anterior Lamellar Keratoplasty Descemet Strip Automate Endothelial Keratoplasty Endothelial Keratoplasty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Supplementary material

337205_1_En_8_MOESM1_ESM.mp4 (552.8 mb)
Video 8.1 The video illustrates the surgical steps of single-pass Ultrathin DSAEK performed with Moria ALTK system using 450 μm single-use head. Donor graft preparation and delivery are shown (MP4 566100 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Veldman PB, Terry MA, Straiko MD. Evolving indications for Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25:306–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmed KA, McLaren JW, Baratz KH, et al. Host and graft thickness after Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;150:490–497.e2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cleynenbruegel HV, Remeijer L, Hillenaar T. Descemet endothelial automated keratoplasty: effect of intraoperative lenticule thickness on visual outcome and endothelial cell density. Cornea. 2011;30:1195–2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daoud YJ, Munro AD, Delmonte DD, et al. Effect of cornea donor graft thickness on the outcome of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;156:860–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Di Pascuale MA, Prasher P, Schlecte C, et al. Corneal deturgescence after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty evaluated by Visante anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148:32–37.e1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neff KD, Biber JM, Holland EJ. Comparison of central corneal graft thickness to visual acuity outcomes in endothelial keratoplasty. Eye Contact Lens. 2009;35:196–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pogorelov P, Cursiefen C, Bachmann BO, et al. Changes in donor corneal lenticule thickness after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) with organ-cultured corneas. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:825–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shinton AJ, Tsatsos M, Konstantopoulos A, et al. Impact of graft thickness on visual acuity after Descemet’s stripping endothelial keratoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96:246–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taravella MJ, Shah V, Davidson R. Ultrathin DSAEK. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2013;53:21–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Terry MA, Straiko MD, Goshe JM, et al. Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: the tenuous relationship between donor thickness and postoperative vision. Ophthalmology. 2012;119:1988–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Woodward MA, Raoof-Daneshvar D, Mian S, et al. Relationship of visual acuity and lamellar thickness in Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2013;32:e69–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bhogal MS, Allan BD. Graft profile and thickness as a function of cut transition speed in Descemet-stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38:690–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dickman MM, VanRooij J, Remeijer L, et al. Preliminary results of a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial comparing ultra-thin and standard thickness Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). Paper presented at ESCRS annual meeting, September 15, 2014. London; 2014.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosa AM, Silva MF, Quadrado MJ, et al. Femtosecond laser and microkeratome-assisted Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty: first clinical results. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:1104–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Phillips PM, Phillips LJ, Maloney CM. Preoperative graft thickness measurements do not influence final BSCVA or speed of vision recovery after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2013;32:1423–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Phillips PM, Phillips LJ, Saad HA, et al. “Ultrathin” DSAEK tissue prepared with a low-pulse energy, high-frequency femtosecond laser. Cornea. 2013;32:81–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vetter JM, Butsch C, Faust M. Irregularity of the posterior corneal surface after curved interface femtosecond laser-assisted versus microkeratome-assisted descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2013;32:118–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mootha VV, Heck E, Verity SM, et al. Comparative study of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty donor preparation by MoriaCB microkeratome, horizon microkeratome, and Intralase FS60. Cornea. 2011;30:320–4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dickman MM, van Maris MP, van Marion FW, et al. Surface metrology and 3-dimensional confocal profiling of femtosecond laser and mechanically dissected ultrathin endothelial lamellae. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55:5183–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dickman MM, Cheng YY, Berendschot TT, et al. Effects of graft thickness and asymmetry on visual gain and aberrations after descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131:737–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Busin M, Madi S, Santorum P, et al. Ultrathin Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with the microkeratome double-pass technique: two-year outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:1186–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OpthalmologyRabin Medical CenterPetach TikvaIsrael
  2. 2.Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  3. 3.Department of Ophthalmology“Villa Igea” HospitalForlìItaly
  4. 4.Istituto internazionale per la Ricerca e Formazione in Oftalmologia (IRFO)ForlìItaly

Personalised recommendations