Warsaw 2013 Programme Registration Exhibition Hotels Virtual Exhibition Warsaw Satellite Meetings Visa Information

Starting keratoprosthesis implantation at our department: results of the first 15 cases

Poster Details

First Author: L.Imre HUNGARY

Co Author(s):                  

Abstract Details



Purpose:

To present the first results of keratoprosthesis implantations performed at our Department.

Setting:

: Semmelweis University Budapest, Hungary, Dept. of Ophthalmology, Tertiary Ophthalmic Center

Methods:

Keratoprosthesis implantation at our Department was begun in August 2010. Between August 2010 and October 2012 fifteen implantations were performed in 15 eyes of 13 patients. The patients’ mean age was 55±15,2 (25-74) years. The indications for surgery were as follows: failed graft (8 eyes), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (2 eyes), ocular cicatricial pemphigoid (2 eyes), corneal burning (2 eyes) and corneal leukoma due to congenital glaucoma (1 eye). The modified Konstantinov-type keratoprosthesis was used in each case (Medicontur Ltd., Hungary). Preoperative visual acuity was hand motion vision in 9 cases, counting fingers at 1 m in 5 cases and light perception in 1 case. We have combined the procedure with keratoplasty in 14 cases and we have implanted the prosthesis in the patient’s own cornea in 1 case. We have removed the patients’ own lens or the intraocular lens in each case. The postoperative local therapy consisted of a combination of steroid and profilactic antibiotic drops.

Results:

The follow-up period was 1-27 months. Our patients’ postoperative best corrected visual acuity was 0,4±0,33 (hand motion vision-1,0). Patients were able to read the visual acuity chart in 7 cases. We have encountered the following complications: corneal perforation near the prosthesis(n=1), secondary glaucoma (n=3), corneal transplant rejection (n=1), symblepharon and ankyloblepharon formation (n=4), vitreal haemorrhage (n=5), mycotic infection in the graft (n=1). No endophthalmitis or retroprosthetic membrane formation was observed. We have noticed a slight protrusion of the prosthesis in one of our cases, but it’s position remained stable

Conclusions:

Despite the small number of cases and the relatively short follow-up period, our results with this type of keratoprosthesis are encouraging. The occurence of complications mostly corresponded to the preoperative status. This revised prosthesis manufactured in our country is available to our patients and may improve the quality of life of patients with severe corneal disease.

Financial Disclosure:

None

Back to previous