首页 正文

Review American journal of ophthalmology. 2023 Jan:245:222-232. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2022.09.013 Q14.12024

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Outcomes After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty

系统评价和meta分析:后囊膜内皮 keratoplasty与超薄剥脱自动内皮keratoplasty的结局比较 翻译改进

Anna-Karina B Maier  1, Jonas Milek  2, Antonia M Joussen  2, Tina Dietrich-Ntoukas  2, Gregor Lichtner  3

作者单位 +展开

作者单位

  • 1 From Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Ophthalmology, Berlin, Germany (A-K.B.M, J.M., A.M.J., T.D-N.). Electronic address: anna-karina.maier@charite.de.
  • 2 From Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Ophthalmology, Berlin, Germany (A-K.B.M, J.M., A.M.J., T.D-N.).
  • 3 Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, Greifswald, Germany (G.L.).
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2022.09.013 PMID: 36220351

    摘要 Ai翻译

    Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of ultrathin Descemet stripping (automated) endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DS(A)EK) versus Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) for the treatment of Fuchs endothelial dystrophy (FED) and bullous keratopathy (BK).

    Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Methods: Literature containing DMEK and UT-DSAEK were searched in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, and through manual reference searching. Studies were included that measured the outcome of interventions-including best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), endothelial cell density (ECD), and postoperative complications, especially graft detachment with the need of re-bubbling, graft rejection, graft failure, and postoperative elevated intraocular pressure (IOP)-in patients with FED and BK. Included outcomes were pooled as standardized mean differences (SMD) or risk ratios (RR) using random effects models. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed using the Q-test and I2 statistic.

    Results: Seven (of 163) studies met all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significantly better BCVA 12 months postoperatively, but an increased re-bubbling rate in eyes after DMEK compared with eyes after UT-DS(A)EK (BCVA: SMD = 0.50 [95% CI 0.27-0.74] and re-bubbling rate: RR = 0.33 [95% CI 0.16-0.67]). All other parameters did not differ significantly between both interventions, although estimates were imprecise (graft failure: RR = 0.65 [95% CI 0.18-2.30], graft rejection: RR = 1.40 [95% CI 0.27-7.30], and postoperative intraocular pressure elevation: RR = 1.14 [95% CI 0.60-2.18]). Postoperative SMDs of ECD could not be evaluated due to significant heterogeneity between studies.

    Conclusions: Although the improvement in BCVA was higher after UT-DS(A)EK than after conventional DS(A)EK, the BCVA after DMEK was still superior. The complication rates were comparable for both procedures, except for the higher rate of re-bubbling after DMEK.

    Keywords:systematic review; meta-analysis; outcomes

    Copyright © American journal of ophthalmology. 中文内容为AI机器翻译,仅供参考!

    相关内容

    期刊名:American journal of ophthalmology

    缩写:AM J OPHTHALMOL

    ISSN:0002-9394

    e-ISSN:1879-1891

    IF/分区:4.1/Q1

    文章目录 更多期刊信息

    全文链接
    引文链接
    复制
    已复制!
    推荐内容
    Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Outcomes After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty