Purpose To analyse the outcome of allo simple limbal epithelial transplantation (alloSLET) in eyes in the early stage following ocular chemical injury to achieve rapid epithelialisation.
Patients and methods Records of 18 eyes of 17 patients who underwent alloSLET between April 2013 and Jan 2016 were analysed retrospectively. Patients with grade 4 or worse Dua's classification for chemical injury, who presented within a month of the injury or with a non-healing epithelial defect since the injury despite earlier medical or surgical interventions, were included in the study. The time to epithelialisation was the primary outcome measure and the best corrected visual acuity, the clinically assessed epithelial phenotype and symblepharon formation were the secondary outcome measures.
Results The mean time to epithelialisation was noted to be 22.5±9.14 days. A best corrected visual acuity of better than 20/120 was achieved in 13 eyes in a mean duration of 33.06+10.73 days following alloSLET. Corneal phenotype with complete epithelialisation was achieved in the immediate postoperative period in 17 of the 18 eyes (94.11%). Seven eyes had a gradual failure of the allograft and 5 eyes underwent subsequent limbal autograft. Symblepharon formation involving one to two quadrants was noted in 3 eyes (16.7%).
Conclusions AlloSLET seems to be a useful technique to achieve rapid epithelialisation in severe chemical injuries thereby preventing the adverse effects of delayed epithelial healing. Visual rehabilitative procedures in the chronic phase of chemical injury, in most instances following an alloSLET in the acute stage, did not require keratoplasty, either lamellar or penetrating.
- Stem Cells
- Treatment Surgery
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Contributors GI, BS and SA: conception, design, analysis and interpretation of data. AT: performing and providing the genetic analysis. GI: drafting the article. GI and BS; revising it critically for important intellectual content. GI, BS and SA: final approval of the version to be published. All authors read and approved the final manuscript
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval Medical Research Foundation Institutional Review Board.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.