Article Text

PDF
Evaluation of a low-cost design keratoprosthesis in end-stage corneal disease: a preliminary study
  1. Namrata Sharma1,
  2. Ruchita Falera1,
  3. Tarun Arora1,
  4. Tushar Agarwal1,
  5. Pooja Bandivadekar1,
  6. Rasik B Vajpayee2
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
  2. 2Vision Eye Institute, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, North West Academic Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Namrata Sharma, Cornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029, India; namrata.sharma{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the indications, outcomes and complications of Auro keratoprosthesis (a low-cost design based on type I Boston Keratoprosthesis) in the end-stage corneal disease in a preliminary study.

Methods In this prospective interventional study, 10 eyes of 10 patients with an end-stage corneal disease underwent implantation of Auro keratoprosthesis with the mean follow-up of 14.5±2.1 months. The indications included multiple failed grafts (n=7), aphakic bullous keratopathy (n=2) and chemical injury (n=1). The additional intraoperative procedures performed were synechiolysis (n=9), cataractous lens extraction (n=2), Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation (n=1) and vitreoretinal surgery (n=1). Antibiotic prophylaxis was administered postoperatively, and patients were followed up at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month and thereafter at monthly intervals. The main outcome measures were best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), retention of prosthesis, complications and need for secondary surgical interventions.

Results The most common indication for keratoprosthesis implantation was graft failure (7/10, 70%). The postoperative BCVA improved to ≥20/200 in six patients. Nine out of 10 patients had retained keratoprosthesis. The complications seen were inflammatory debris behind keratoprosthesis (n=4), retroprosthetic membrane (n=2), glaucoma (n=4), small (<2 mm) sterile stromal necrosis or erosions at the graft edge (n=3) and microbial keratitis (n=1). Explantation of the keratoprosthesis was performed in one eye due to fungal keratitis.

Conclusions Auro keratoprosthesis, a low-cost keratoprosthesis, is a viable option in the end-stage corneal disease in this preliminary study. Multicentre studies with long-term follow-up are required to conclusively prove its safety and efficacy.

  • Cornea

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • At a glance
    Keith Barton James Chodosh Jost Jonas