RESUMO
Purpose@#To compare the clinical outcomes of penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in eyes with Glaucoma Ahmed Valve implants. @*Methods@#The charts of 11 patients who underwent PKP and 11 who underwent DSAEK between February 2016 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed; all patients previously underwent Ahmed valve implant surgery. The best corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and endothelial cell count were compared 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Graft rejection and graft failure were also evaluated during follow-up. The survival rates were compared using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. @*Results@#The difference in graft survival rates of the PKP and DSAEK groups was not significant (p = 0.295); however, graft failure occurred earlier in the PKP group (12.9 ± 10.1 vs. 18.8 ± 5.3 months). The postoperative best corrected visual acuity of the PKP group had improved at 1 (p = 0.027) and 3 (p = 0.017) months, while the DSAEK group showed significant improvement at 1, 3, and 6 months (all p = 0.005). Intergroup analysis showed better visual prognosis of the DSAEK group at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery (p = 0.023, p = 0.007, and p = 0.004, respectively). @*Conclusions@#In our study, the two corneal transplantation methods did not have significantly different graft survival rates; however, graft failure occured later in the DSAEK group and the postoperative visual acuity was better than in the PKP group. Although further study is needed, performing DSAEK in patients with an Ahmed valve implant seems to be a good alternative to PKP.
RESUMO
Purpose@#We compare the clinical outcomes of femtosecond-laser penetrating keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty performed using a manual trephine. @*Methods@#The clinical outcomes of 21 eyes that underwent penetrating keratoplasty using a manual trephine and 29 eyes that underwent femtosecond-laser penetrating keratoplasty were compared in terms of best-corrected visual acuity, refractive and corneal astigmatisms, endothelial cell counts, and graft rejection and failure. @*Results@#The best-corrected visual acuities measured 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after surgery were logMAR 1.21, 1.28, 1.25, 1.14, and 1.43 for the manual trephine group and logMAR 0.82, 0.71, 0.78, 0.49, and 0.56 for the femtosecond-laser group; the latter group thus exhibited better visual acuity at all times. The refractive astigmatism values were 5.13, 6.35, 5.28, 5.18, and 6.36 diopters (D) for the manual trephine group and 6.09, 6.33, 5.14, 5.23, and 4.89 D for the femtosecond-laser group. The corneal astigmatism values were 5.40, 6.45, 6.30, 5.64, and 5.78 D for the manual trephine group and 6.17, 6.24, 5.72, 5.02, and 4.83 D for the femtosecond-laser group. The refractive astigmatism was significantly lower at 18 months after surgery and the corneal astigmatism was significantly lower at both 12 and 18 months after surgery in the femtosecond-laser group. None of endothelial cell count, graft rejection or failure rate, differed significantly between the two groups. @*Conclusions@#Femtosecond-laser-enabled keratoplasty affords better visual recovery, less refractive and corneal astigmatism, and better wound stability than does penetrating keratoplasty using a manual trephine.
RESUMO
Purpose@#We compare the clinical outcomes of femtosecond-laser penetrating keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty performed using a manual trephine. @*Methods@#The clinical outcomes of 21 eyes that underwent penetrating keratoplasty using a manual trephine and 29 eyes that underwent femtosecond-laser penetrating keratoplasty were compared in terms of best-corrected visual acuity, refractive and corneal astigmatisms, endothelial cell counts, and graft rejection and failure. @*Results@#The best-corrected visual acuities measured 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after surgery were logMAR 1.21, 1.28, 1.25, 1.14, and 1.43 for the manual trephine group and logMAR 0.82, 0.71, 0.78, 0.49, and 0.56 for the femtosecond-laser group; the latter group thus exhibited better visual acuity at all times. The refractive astigmatism values were 5.13, 6.35, 5.28, 5.18, and 6.36 diopters (D) for the manual trephine group and 6.09, 6.33, 5.14, 5.23, and 4.89 D for the femtosecond-laser group. The corneal astigmatism values were 5.40, 6.45, 6.30, 5.64, and 5.78 D for the manual trephine group and 6.17, 6.24, 5.72, 5.02, and 4.83 D for the femtosecond-laser group. The refractive astigmatism was significantly lower at 18 months after surgery and the corneal astigmatism was significantly lower at both 12 and 18 months after surgery in the femtosecond-laser group. None of endothelial cell count, graft rejection or failure rate, differed significantly between the two groups. @*Conclusions@#Femtosecond-laser-enabled keratoplasty affords better visual recovery, less refractive and corneal astigmatism, and better wound stability than does penetrating keratoplasty using a manual trephine.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: We report a case of fungal ball after Endoscopic Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) in a 40-year-old female patient. CASE SUMMARY: A 40-year-old female patient was admitted to our hospital for left lower eyelid tenderness and bloody discharge from the lacrimal punctum. During a planned endoscopic DCR, the sac was opened after the osteotomy, and 2 fungal balls were found in the lacrimal sac. The masses were 7 × 5 mm and, 9 × 5 mm sized, irregularly shaped, and red in color. Aspergillus fumigatus was diagnosed pathologically. Postoperative paranasal sinus magnetic resonance imaging showed no residual fungal ball. During follow-up, the patient showed patent rhinostomy opening, and there was no evidence of fungal infection on nasal endoscopic finding. CONCLUSIONS: Although Aspergillus fumigatus is a rare cause of canalicular obstruction, fungal ball development in the lacrimal sac can cause acute dacryocystitis.