One-year Outcomes of Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Combined with Cataract Surgery in the Korean Population.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the refractive outcomes after ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) combined with phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation (triple procedure) in the South Korean population. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 37 eyes of 36 patients who underwent the UT-DSAEK triple procedure between 2012 and 2021 in a single tertiary hospital. Preoperative and postoperative refractive outcomes and endothelial parameters at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months were observed. RESULTS: At the final postoperative 12-month period, the average best-corrected visual acuity was 0.4 ± 0.5 in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution. The mean endothelial cell density at 12 months was 1,841.92 ± 731.24 cells/mm2, indicating no significant endothelial cell loss compared to the baseline (p = 0.128). The mean postoperative central corneal thickness at 12 months was 597.41 ± 86.26 µm. The postoperative mean absolute error at 12 months was 0.96 ± 0.89 diopters (D) and mean error was 0.89 ± 0.97 D. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our South Korean cohort study on UT-DSAEK triple surgery showed favorable and safe outcomes. Regardless of graft thickness, it should be noted that a hyperopic shift of 1.00 to 2.00 D needs to be considered in the case of UT-DSAEK triple surgery.

Efficacy and safety of UT-DSAEK combined with Carlevale's sutureless scleral fixation IOL.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a novel surgical combination of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) and sutureless scleral fixation for Carlevale intraocular lens (SSF-Carlevale IOL) implantation to manage corneal endothelial decompensation when there is a concomitant need for secondary IOL fixation. METHODS: Clinical data collected from 10 eyes of 9 patients with bullous keratopathy (BK) who underwent combined UT-DSAEK and SSF-Carlevale IOL implantation in a single procedure were retrospectively analyzed. Anterior chamber IOL (4 cases), aphakia (4 cases, 1 of which associated with PEX), and previous trauma (2 cases) were the conditions responsible for BK. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell density (ECD), central corneal thickness (CCT), graft thickness (GT) and complications were recorded over a 12-month follow-up period. RESULTS: In 90% (9/10) of eyes graft clarity was maintained during follow-up. The mean CDVA improved significantly (p < 0.0001) from 1.78 ± 0.76 logMAR preoperatively to 0.53 ± 0.3 logMAR at 12 months. ECD on average decreased from 2575 ± 125.3 cells/mm2 (donor tissue) to 1697 ± 133.3 cells/mm2 in 12 months. The mean CCT decreased from 870 ± 200 µm to 650 µm ± 9 at 12 months (ANOVA, p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Combined UT-DSAEK and SSF-Carlevale IOL implantation was associated with good corneal graft survival and IOP control, with few complications. These findings suggest that this surgical approach is a practical option for patients requiring both treatment for corneal endothelial dysfunction and secondary IOL implantation.

Ultrathin-Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of Ultrathin - Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) for the treatment of corneal endothelial failure in patients with Fuchs endothelial dystrophy (FED) or Pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis and conducted a literature search in PubMed and Cochrane Library, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Effects were calculated as odds ratios or standardized mean differences. RESULTS: A total of six studies with 300 eyes in total (151 UT-DSAE and 149 DMEK) were included. BSCVA was superior in the DMEK group compared with the UT-DSAEK at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Rebubbling rates and overall adverse events were 2.37 and 1.48 times, respectively, higher in the DMEK group. The central corneal thickness and spherical equivalent were significantly lower in the DMEK group 12 months post-surgery. Endothelial cell density values were similar in both groups up to 12 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis comparing UT-DSAEK with DMEK. DMEK surgery resulted in significantly better BSCVA at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively compared to UT-DSAEK. UT-DSAEK had a better complication profile with lower rebubbling rates.

Results of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with donor corneas preserved in synthetic organ culture media.

PURPOSE: To evaluate outcomes of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) with donor corneas preserved at 31°C in Cornea Syn®, a medium formulated with recombinant human serum albumin (rHSA) to replace foetal calf serum, and deswelled-transported in the xeno-free medium Cornea Trans®. METHODS: Prospective, multicentre, open-label study. We evaluated the endothelial cell loss (ECL) as the percentage variation of the endothelial cell density (ECD, cells/mm2) between 6 and 12 months after surgery, corneal transparency and thickness at 12 months, and adverse events within 12 months. Endothelial lenticules of mean 89 µm, ECD ≥ 2300 cells/mm2, minimum signs of cell mortality or morphology alterations, were dissected by microkeratome in the eye bank, and grafted in patients ≥ 18 years without corneal neovascularisation, conjunctivalization, or blinking impairment. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients underwent UT-DSAEK, 3 showed primary failure, 1 late failure, and 2 skipped the 6-month visit. We analysed data from 29 patients, 27 with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) and 2 with pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK). The median ECL between 6 and 12 months was 2.6% (p = .054, CI 0 to 12.5) and the absolute mean (SD) was 158.4 (364.1) cells/mm2. After 12 months, 96.5% of corneas were clear, with mean pachymetry of 585.9 (50.4) µm. CONCLUSIONS: The ECL rate after UT-DSAEK match overall that observed in DSAEK or UT-DSAEK models of endothelial survival and the overall safety compared that reported for similar follow-up. Corneas maintained in Cornea Syn® and Cornea Trans® did not affect the ECD and functional outcomes of UT-DSAEK up to 12 months.

Microkeratome-assisted ultrathin Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: A randomized trial comparing single-pass versus double-pass technique.

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of two techniques, for preparation of microkeratome-assisted ultrathin grafts for Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). Methods: The study involved 20 eyes of 20 patients with pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, randomized into two groups. Group 1 eyes underwent microkeratome-assisted DSAEK using the single-pass technique for lenticule preparation, whereas group 2 eyes underwent microkeratome-assisted DSAEK using the double-pass technique. Patients were followed up till 6 months, postoperatively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at final follow-up was considered as the primary outcome measure, whereas graft thickness (GT) contrast sensitivity and endothelial cell loss were considered as the secondary outcome measures. A P value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: Baseline characteristics of two groups were comparable. The mean central GT was comparable in both groups at 6 months follow-up [group 1: 98 ± 24.46 µm, group 2: 129 ± 31.46 µm (P = 0.18)]. Both groups fared equally in terms of BCVA (P = 0.33). Contrast sensitivity was significantly better in group 1 eyes (P = 0.045). A statistically significant negative correlation was found between postoperative BCVA and postoperative GT (R = -0.728, P = 0.016). The percentage endothelial cell loss was slightly higher in group 2 eyes, although not statistically significant. Two eyes in group 2 experienced complications during lenticule preparation. None of the eye experienced any complication in the postoperative period. Conclusion: Both techniques provided grafts with comparable thickness and endothelial cell loss and were associated with comparable BCVA, at final follow-up visit. The contrast sensitivity was, however, better in eyes receiving grafts prepared with the single-pass technique.

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus DSAEK.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus standard DSAEK. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis using data from a multicentre randomized clinical trial was performed. The time horizon was 12 months postoperatively. Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients with Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy were included and randomized to UT-DSAEK (n = 33) or DSAEK (n = 31). Relevant resources from healthcare and societal perspectives were included in the cost analysis. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were determined using the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 questionnaire. The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; incremental societal costs per QALY). RESULTS: Societal costs were €9431 (US$11 586) for UT-DSAEK and €9110 (US$11 192) for DSAEK. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.74 in both groups. The ICER indicated inferiority of UT-DSAEK. The cost-effectiveness probability ranged from 37% to 42%, assuming the maximum acceptable ICER ranged from €2500-€80 000 (US$3071-US$98 280) per QALY. Additional analyses were performed omitting one UT-DSAEK patient who required a regraft [ICER €9057 (US$11 127) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 44-62%] and correcting QALYs for an imbalance in baseline utilities [ICER €23 827 (US$29 271) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 36-59%]. Furthermore, the ICER was €2101 (US$2581) per patient with clinical improvement in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (≥0.2 logMAR) and €3274 (US$4022) per patient with clinical improvement in National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 composite score (≥10 points). CONCLUSION: The base case analysis favoured DSAEK, since costs of UT-DSAEK were higher while QALYs were comparable. However, additional analyses revealed no preference for UT-DSAEK or DSAEK. Further cost-effectiveness studies are required to reduce uncertainty.