advertisement
Abstract #112580 Published in IGR 24-3
Glaucoma after penetrating keratoplasty and keratoprosthesis
Khair D; El-Khoury J; Thompson P; Racine L; Harissi-Dagher MJournal Français d'Ophtalmologie 2024; 47: 104023
PURPOSE: To compare visual and glaucoma outcomes in patients with known glaucoma after a penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) or a Boston Keratoprosthesis Type 1 (KPro) as a second corneal replacement procedure. DESIGN: Retrospective interventional case series. PARTICIPANTS: Charts of 141 eyes that underwent either a PKP or KPro at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal after one failed PKP from 2008 to 2020 were reviewed. Forty-six eyes with preoperative glaucoma were included. METHODS: Data collected included demographics, indication for the initial surgery, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), concurrent ocular disorders, number of glaucoma medications, need for glaucoma surgery, cup-to-disc ratios (CDRs), mean RNFL thickness, and visual field (VF) characteristics. Primary outcomes were glaucoma progression trends. Secondary outcomes were visual outcomes and need for additional procedures. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 4.7 years for the PKP and 7.3 for the KPro group (P<0.007). 30.6% of PKP compared to 70.5% of KPro patients were diagnosed with glaucoma preoperatively. Glaucoma worsened similarly in both groups; this is based on an analysis of the number of glaucoma medications, CDR, need for glaucoma surgery, and characteristic VF changes. Patients in the PKP group required significantly more regrafts than patients in the KPro group (31.8 vs. 8.3%; P=0.045). CONCLUSIONS: A preoperative diagnosis of glaucoma does not preclude KPro implantation. In glaucomatous eyes, the disease progressed similarly in both groups. Since both procedures increase the risk of worsening glaucoma, close follow-up is recommended. KPro may decrease the need for further corneal transplantation surgery.
Department of Ophthalmology, centre hospitalier de l'université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, H2X 3E4, Canada; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, USA.
Full article