Clinical outcomes in post-epikeratophakic eyes after removal of epikeratoplasty lenticule.
Complication
Epikeratophakia
Epikeratophakic lenticule
Reversiblity
Journal
BMC ophthalmology
ISSN: 1471-2415
Titre abrégé: BMC Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Sep 2021
29 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
06
04
2021
accepted:
15
09
2021
entrez:
30
9
2021
pubmed:
1
10
2021
medline:
2
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Assessment of the optical outcome and adverse events in post-epikeratopathic eyes after removal of the epikeratoplasty lenticule (EKPL). This was a retrospective case-series study of patients who underwent EKPL removal between 2002 and 2020. Ten eyes were included in the analysis. We compared the clinical characteristics of the patients before surgery, 6 months after surgery, before lenticular removal, and after removal, and reported optical or ocular surface complications. We removed EKPL due to the lenticular opacity in five eyes (50%), intraocular lens (IOL) insertion (n = 4, 40%) after cataract surgery (n = 3) or in aphakic eyes (n = 1), and lenticule-induced irregular astigmatism in one eye (10%). After EKPL removal, the mean refractive power of the cornea (Km) revealed a tendency to increase. Out of nine cases, six cases showed corneal steepening and three cases revealed corneal flattening. When the keratometric readings of pre-epikeratoplasty and post-lenticular removal were compared within the same case, the average difference was 5.1 D ± 4.0 (n = 8). Complications were observed in 3 of 10 cases (excessive corneal flatness, ectatic change, and abnormal epithelial cell ingrowth) after removal. The surgeon should expect the corneal refractive power to steepen or flatten in some cases with abnormal astigmatism and irregularity. Epikeratophakic eyes may exhibit serious ectatic changes, and abnormal epithelial cell ingrowth after removal of epikeratophakic lenticules.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Assessment of the optical outcome and adverse events in post-epikeratopathic eyes after removal of the epikeratoplasty lenticule (EKPL).
METHODS
METHODS
This was a retrospective case-series study of patients who underwent EKPL removal between 2002 and 2020. Ten eyes were included in the analysis. We compared the clinical characteristics of the patients before surgery, 6 months after surgery, before lenticular removal, and after removal, and reported optical or ocular surface complications.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We removed EKPL due to the lenticular opacity in five eyes (50%), intraocular lens (IOL) insertion (n = 4, 40%) after cataract surgery (n = 3) or in aphakic eyes (n = 1), and lenticule-induced irregular astigmatism in one eye (10%). After EKPL removal, the mean refractive power of the cornea (Km) revealed a tendency to increase. Out of nine cases, six cases showed corneal steepening and three cases revealed corneal flattening. When the keratometric readings of pre-epikeratoplasty and post-lenticular removal were compared within the same case, the average difference was 5.1 D ± 4.0 (n = 8). Complications were observed in 3 of 10 cases (excessive corneal flatness, ectatic change, and abnormal epithelial cell ingrowth) after removal.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The surgeon should expect the corneal refractive power to steepen or flatten in some cases with abnormal astigmatism and irregularity. Epikeratophakic eyes may exhibit serious ectatic changes, and abnormal epithelial cell ingrowth after removal of epikeratophakic lenticules.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34587920
doi: 10.1186/s12886-021-02109-9
pii: 10.1186/s12886-021-02109-9
pmc: PMC8480107
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
350Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Fortschr Ophthalmol. 1991;88(1):4-11
pubmed: 2045024
Arch Ophthalmol. 1987 Nov;105(11):1556-60
pubmed: 3314825
Br J Ophthalmol. 1990 Feb;74(2):67-72
pubmed: 2310729
Ophthalmologe. 2004 Mar;101(3):285-9
pubmed: 15004716
Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1994 Jun;72(3):363-8
pubmed: 7976269
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008 Feb;34(2):327-9
pubmed: 18242462
J Refract Surg. 2003 May-Jun;19(3):383-4
pubmed: 12777040
Arch Ophthalmol. 1986 Oct;104(10):1505-8
pubmed: 3533015
J Refract Surg. 1997 Jan-Feb;13(1):45-54
pubmed: 9049935
J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999 Apr;25(4):500-7
pubmed: 10198854
J Biol Chem. 2003 May 9;278(19):16587-94
pubmed: 12606541
Ophthalmology. 1993 Aug;100(8):1225-9
pubmed: 8341506
Curr Eye Res. 1981;1(3):131-7
pubmed: 7028402
Semin Ophthalmol. 2018;33(7-8):869-877
pubmed: 30359155
Cornea. 2007 Dec;26(10):1210-2
pubmed: 18043178
Curr Eye Res. 1981;1(3):123-9
pubmed: 7028401
Cornea. 2018 Dec;37(12):1517-1521
pubmed: 30222719
Ophthalmology. 2003 Nov;110(11):2147-52
pubmed: 14597522
BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2018 Mar 29;3(1):e000133
pubmed: 29657982
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Mar;41(3):670-3
pubmed: 25535108
Yan Ke Xue Bao. 1994 Jun;10(2):85-9
pubmed: 7843399
Ophthalmology. 1985 Oct;92(10):1417-22
pubmed: 4069604
Arch Ophthalmol. 1981 Nov;99(11):1957-60
pubmed: 7028010