Журнал клинической и экспериментальной офтальмологии
Открытый доступ

Абстрактный

Survey of Experts on Current Endothelial Keratoplasty Techniques

Winston Chamberlain, Ariana Austin, Mark Terry, Bennie H Jeng and Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer

Objective: To survey cornea specialists’ opinions on different endothelial keratoplasty techniques and to gauge the perceived need for and utility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing them.
Methods: A short survey was distributed to a group of cornea specialists at the Endothelial Keratoplasty Group meeting at the American Academy of Ophthalmology meeting in November 2015.
Results: Thirty-three of 80 practicing surgeons present at the EKG meeting participated in the survey, yielding a response rate of 41%. Ninety-seven percent (n=32) of our respondents reported performing Descemet’s Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSEK) regularly, and 70% reported having performed Descemet’s Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) at least once (n=23). While most respondents (n=26, 79%) thought there was at least some evidence that DMEK is superior to DSEK in terms of visual acuity, there was less certainty about comparing ultrathin-DSEK (UT-DSEK) to DMEK with 48% (n=16) thinking there was at least some evidence of DMEK’s superiority, 6% (n=2) thinking there was at least some evidence of UT-DSEK’s superiority, and 30% (n=10) unsure. Seventy-two percent (n=23) of respondents thought an RCT comparing visual acuity outcomes in UT-DSEK versus DMEK would be at least moderately beneficial, and 82% (n=27) reported they were at least moderately likely to change their EK technique based on the results of said RCT.
Conclusion: There is substantial interest in an RCT comparing visual acuity outcomes in UT-DSEK versus DMEK.