Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Delayed suprachoroidal haemorrhage following Boston Keratoprosthesis in two aniridic patients
  1. Cynthia Xin-ya Qian1,
  2. Mona Harissi-Dagher2
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, Université de Montréal, Québec, Canada
  2. 2Department of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Notre-Dame—Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montréal, Québec, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Cynthia Xin-ya Qian, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Hôpital Maisonneuve Rosemont, Centre ambulatoire Ophtalmologie Local F 101, 5415 boul. de l'Assomption, Montréal, Qc H1T 2M4, Canada; xin-ya.qian{at}

Statistics from

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.

In recent years, the heightened success of the Boston Keratoprosthesis type I (KPro) has broadened its indications and also uncovered new complications, the most common being retroprosthetic membrane formation, endophthalmitis, progression of glaucoma and infectious keratitis.1 This study reports on the development of delayed appositional suprachoroidal haemorrhage in two aniridic patients, a rare complication post-KPro surgery.

Case 1

A 69-year-old woman with aniridia and glaucoma presented 3 days post-KPro surgery OD with pain and decreased vision. Ocular history included an extracapsular cataract extraction with vitrectomy OD and a KPro surgery OS. Medical history was non-contributory. On exam, visual acuity was light perception (CF (counting fingers) preop and HM (hand motion) on postop 1 day) and the intraocular pressure (IOP) on manual palpation was 5 mm Hg OD and 15 mm Hg OS. Biomicroscopy revealed an injected conjunctiva, a formed anterior chamber, intact sutures and a well-placed KPro covered by a soft contact lens. B-scan confirmed the presence of a suprachoroidal haemorrhage. …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Ethics Committee Centre Hospitalier Université de Montreal.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.