Changing trends in corneal transplantation: a national review of current practices in the Republic of Ireland

Iselin, Katja; Greenan, Emily; Hynes, Colin; Shaw, Sandra; Fulcher, Tim; Power, William; Quill, Barry; Guérin, Marc; Lee, Weng H; Murphy, Conor C

doi:10.1007/s11845-020-02340-1

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings from the Australian Corneal Graft Registry mirror the international experiences for both patterns of practice and outcomes of corneal transplantation in many respects. New lamellar procedures have replaced penetrating keratoplasties, especially for keratoconus and Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, in jurisdictions including the United States of America, 17 Europe, 43 the Republic of Ireland, 44 the United Kingdom, 45 Singapore 46 and New Zealand 47 . A global survey 48 of corneal transplantation and eye banking practices in 116 countries, published in 2016, indicated that the main indications for corneal transplantation were Fuchs endothelial dystrophy, keratoconus and the sequelae of infectious keratitis, but significant geographical differences were reported.…”

Section: Australian Outcomes Set In An International Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of corneal transplantation in Australia, in an era of lamellar keratoplasty

Williams

Keane

2022

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Widespread adoption of modern lamellar procedures has altered the pattern of practice of corneal transplantation. Herein, we describe recent findings from the Australian Corneal Graft Registry and place these data into an international context. The total number of grafts reported to the Registry has doubled over the past decade. Deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty is increasingly used for keratoconus, while endokeratoplasty has displaced penetrating keratoplasty for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy. Graft survival and visual outcomes for modern lamellar procedures have shown improvement over time. First deep anterior lamellar and penetrating grafts for keratoconus show comparable survival and long-term best-corrected visual acuity is equivalent. Penetrating grafts for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy exhibit significantly better survival than do endokeratoplasties, largely because the latter undergo more early graft failures.However, visual rehabilitation is swifter in surviving endokeratoplasties. Significantly fewer recipients of a deep anterior lamellar graft or endokeratoplasty require spectacle or contact lens correction, compared with penetrating keratoplasty.

show abstract

Section: Australian Outcomes Set In An International Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of corneal transplantation in Australia, in an era of lamellar keratoplasty

Williams

Keane

2022

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the obvious benefits of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in rehabilitation, best corrected vision and rejection episode, DSAEK is still the favoured endothelial keratoplasty procedure in some regions. 2,3 DSAEK is a standardized procedure with a Rebubbling rate in preloaded versus surgeon prepared DSAEK shorter learning curve compared to DMEK and, therefore, has gained wider acceptance quickly for its relative simplicity, reproducibility and efficiency. 4 However, the time and instruments required for preparing a DSAEK graft increase the overall cost of the procedure and sometimes tissue may be lost in preparation leading to cancelled surgery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebubbling rate in preloaded versus surgeon prepared DSAEK

Pagano

Gadhvi

Coco

et al. 2021

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes of eye bank preloaded Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) grafts and surgeon prepared. Methods: In this retrospective study, the data were obtained from two groups (a) surgeon cut DSAEK where tissue was prepared by the surgeon immediately before surgery, and (b) preloaded DSAEK tissue shipped to the surgeon after preparation by the eye bank. Standard DSAEK preparations using Moria microkeratome with single pass method were performed. For the tissues prepared by the eye banks, they were preloaded in an iGlide device and shipped in transport media. Standard DSAEK surgery using bimanual pull-through technique was performed for all the grafts. Air was used as a tamponade. Main outcome measures included best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and rebubbling rate. Result: Out of 107 eyes of 101 patients that underwent DSAEK surgery, 33 tissues were prepared by the surgeon (sc-DSAEK), while 74 were prepared by the eye bank (pl-DSAEK). sc-DSAEK showed a rebubbling rate of 9.1%, compared to the 16.2% for the preloaded DSAEK ( p = 0.11). There was no statistical difference in postoperative BCVA between the two groups. Logistic regression analysis showed no association between detachment rate and cataract surgery, graft preparation method, graft diameter and reason for graft. Conclusion: Preloaded grafts have similar rebubbling rate and visual acuity achieved compared with surgeon prepared grafts.

show abstract

“…As given in Table 1, 9 registries originate from the European region (the United Kingdom, 9 the Netherlands, 10 Sweden, 11 Hungary, 12 France, 13 Germany, 14 Ireland, 15 Norway, 16 and the European Union 17 ), 3 are located in North America (the United States 18,19 and Canada 20 ), 2 are based in Asia (Singapore 21 and India 22 ), and 1 each in Australia 23 and South America (Brazil). 24 Eleven registries cover national data, 9–15,18,21,23,24 1 web-based registry covers multinational data (ECCTR), 17 1 covers regional grafts, 20 and 3 others include data from single centers. 16,19,22 For data inclusion, registries run by government organizations such as UK Transplant Registry, 9 French Biomedicine Agency Registry System, 13 and Brazilian Transplant Registry 24 generally require compulsory data entry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As given in Table 1, 9 registries originate from the European region (the United Kingdom, 9 the Netherlands, 10 Sweden, 11 Hungary, 12 France, 13 Germany, 14 Ireland, 15 Norway, 16 and the European Union 17 ), 3 are located in North America (the United States 18,19 and Canada 20 ), 2 are based in Asia (Singapore 21 and India 22 ), and 1 each in Australia 23 and South America (Brazil). 24 Eleven registries cover national data, [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]18,21,23,24 1 web-based registry covers multinational Australia, 1985 23 National, .90% of the corneal grafts performed in Australia 42 (v) 1987-2000: Indications, outcomes, graft survival of corneal transplant in Australia, 23,25,105,106 lens status and transplant outcomes, 107 and influence of advanced recipient and donor age on the transplant outcomes. 108 2001-2010: Risk factors of graft failure 37 and influence of rejections on graft survival 42,43 2011-2015: Transplant results in keratoconus 109,110 and pediatric population, 26 54,111…”

Section: Origin and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most registries collect recipient sex, age, and indications for transplant, 10,13,18,22 whereas certain registries probe more detailed recipient ophthalmic histories (eg, previous grafts or intraocular surgery) and local findings (eg, presence of corneal vessels, lens status, or raised intraocular pressure) that enable analyses of recipient factors related to outcomes. 10,23,31,32 Surgical procedures were commonly divided by surgical types as penetrating keratoplasty (PK), endothelial keratoplasty (EK), or anterior lamellar keratoplasty (ALK) 15,33,34 or by the treatment purposes as optical, therapeutic, or tectonic transplant. 22,31,35 Several registries Canada (ON), 1985 128 Regional, multicentered 20 (n/a)…”

Section: Data Elementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Keratoplasty Registries: Lessons Learned

Chu

Liu

et al. 2022

Cornea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

:Clinical registries have been developed for decades in the field of ophthalmology, and they are especially well-suited to the study of keratoplasty practices. A comprehensive donor/recipient registry system can provide insight into donor, recipient, and surgical factors associated with immediate and long-term outcomes and adverse reactions. Furthermore, linkage with demographic databases can elucidate relationships with social determinants of health and potentially shape public policy. The vast sample size and multicenter nature of registries enable researchers to conduct sophisticated multivariate or multilayered analyses. In this review, we aim to emphasize the importance of registry data for keratoplasty practice and 1) summarize the structure of current keratoplasty registries; 2) examine the features and scientific contributions of the registries from Australia, the United Kingdom, Singapore, the Netherlands, Sweden, Eye Bank Association of America, and European Cornea and Cell Transplant registries; 3) compare registry-based studies with large single-site clinical studies; 4) compare registry-based studies with randomized control studies; and 5) make recommendations for future development of keratoplasty registries. Keratoplasty registries have increased our knowledge of corneal transplant practices and their outcomes. Future keratoplasty registry-based studies may be further strengthened by record linkage, data sharing, and international collaboration.

show abstract

Changing trends in corneal transplantation: a national review of current practices in the Republic of Ireland

Cited by 10 publications

References 37 publications

Outcomes of corneal transplantation in Australia, in an era of lamellar keratoplasty

Outcomes of corneal transplantation in Australia, in an era of lamellar keratoplasty

Rebubbling rate in preloaded versus surgeon prepared DSAEK

Keratoplasty Registries: Lessons Learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About