Free Papers

Corneal densitometry comparison between Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and Descemet stripping automated keratoplasty up to 6 month follow-up using Scheimpflug based device

Free Paper Details

First Author: J.Peraza-Nieves SPAIN

Co Author(s):    C. Rocha de Lossada   J. Sanchez-Gonzalez   A. Musayeva   J. Torras-Sanvicens   T. Hernandez-Trujillo   M. Sánchez-Valera     

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare corneal densitometry using Scheimpflug based device after six months follow up of consecutive 52 endothelial keratoplasty DMEK/DSAEK

Setting:

Hospital Clínic de Barcelona

Methods:

We compared corneal densitometry(CD) of 152 eyes divided in 3 main groups: 33 DMEKs, 19 DSAEKs at 1,3 and 6 months follow-up paired with 100 healthy eyes without previous ocular surgery. The CD values were analyzed and compared between the groups. We measured three main layers in depth (anterior: 120 m , posterior: 60 m and central: the thickness in between) and different 4 main concentric zones (central 2mm, 2-6 mm, 6-10 mm) at 1, 3 or 6 months postoperatively.

Results:

In DMEK group total CD decreased between first and third month from 38.02 ± 10.21 GSU to 34.67 ± 11.54 GSU (p< 0.01) and also among third and sixth month (from 34.67 ± 11.54 GSU to 31.13 ± 9.25 GSU (p< 0.01). In DSAEK group we found significant changes between the first and three months (from 42.62 ± 9.31 GSU to 38.71 ± 10.53 GSU (p<0.01). Comparing both techniques DMEK reported 31.13 ± 9.24 GSU and DSAEK, 37.40 ± 12.69 GSU , (p<0.05). Assessing concentric zones : In DMEK group densitometry decreased at central from 33.55 ± 12.07 GSU to 30.63 ± 10.15 GSU (p<0.01) and increased at periphery from 30.63 ± 10.15 GSU to 36.72 ± 9.37 GSU, (P< 0.01). In DSAEK group the behavior was different: no differences were found between central-paracentral zones and significantly increased at peripheral zone to 41.91 ± 9.28 GSU, (p< 0.01) In depth: A progressive decrease was observed in DMEK from anterior: 44.76 ± 13.55 GSU, central: 33.29 ± 10.37 GSU, (p< 0.01) to posterior layer: 27.62 ± 9.62 GSU, (p< 0.01) and in DSAEK group anterior layer reported 49.93 ± 15.01 GSU, central: 38.25 ± 11.80 GSU, (p<0.01) and posterior layer reported 30.47 ± 5.21 GSU, (p<0.01).Comparing both techniques we found no statistically significant difference between 3 layers.

Conclusions:

Corneal densitometry could be an objective parameter to evaluate corneal transparency. No differences were found in CD at 6 months follow-up between DMEK and DSAEK when layers in depth were analyzed. A different pattern occurred when comparing concentric zones: central-paracentral CD decreased in DMEK while in DSAEK there was no differences. At periphery both techniques reported a significant increase with higher values for DSAEK.

Financial Disclosure:

... gains financially from competing product or procedure, ... travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... receives non-monetary benefits from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... is employed by a competing company, ... has significant investment interest in a company producing, developing or supplying product or procedure presented