Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Paediatric keratoplasty: choices and conundrums
  1. Anagha Medsinge,
  2. Ken K Nischal
  1. Pediatric Ophthalmology, Strabismus and Adult Motility, UPMC Eye Center, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ken K Nischal, Department of Pediatric Ophthalmology, Strabismus and Adult Motility, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, FP 5105, Pittsburgh, PA 15224, USA; nischalkk{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.

Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) has revolutionised corneal transplantation in cases with pure endothelial dysfunction. Recently, DSEK has become a popular procedure among paediatric corneal surgeons globally for pure endothelial dysfunction, because it is said to provide early visual rehabilitation and an improved safety profile compared with traditional penetrating keratoplasty (PKP).1 ,2 Does it though?

In this issue, Ashar et al3 attempt to answer this question by describing a paired-eye comparison of DSEK and PKP in children with congenital hereditary endothelial dystrophy (CHED).

The authors have compared the outcomes of two techniques in the fellow eyes of the same patient at 1-year follow-up in terms of graft clarity, visual outcome and complications. There was no significant difference in the spherical component of the refraction with significantly lower astigmatism in DSEK. Although all the grafts were clear at 1 year, the authors observed that the graft clarity after DSEK never reached that obtained after PKP. Why should that be?

A review of all the series published thus far on endothelial keratoplasty in children is summarised in table 1. There are a total of 54 eyes of 45 patients who underwent …

View Full Text


  • Contributors AM and KKN wrote this article together with Dr M Edsinghe collecting the references and writing the manuscript under my direct supervision at all times.

  • .

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles