Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty/Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Publisher Pubmed



Singh A1, 2 ; Zareighanavati M3, 4 ; Avadhanam V1, 3 ; Liu C1, 3, 5
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, United Kingdom
  2. 2. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust, Kent, United Kingdom
  3. 3. Sussex Eye Hospital, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Eastern Road, Brighton, BN2 5BE, United Kingdom
  4. 4. Eye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  5. 5. Tongdean Eye Clinic, Hove, United Kingdom

Source: Cornea Published:2017


Abstract

Purpose: To review and compare the published reports of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty/Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK/DSAEK) procedures with regard to endothelial cell density/loss, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, central corneal thickness, subjective outcomes (patient's reported satisfaction/preference), and postoperative complications. Methods: A thorough search was conducted in the databases including AMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and MEDLINE without date restrictions. Systematic reviews, meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, case series, and audits comparing DMEK and DSAEK were included. Results: DMEK is superior to DSAEK for the following outcomes: visual acuity, central corneal thickness, and patient satisfaction. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean spectacle-corrected visual acuity at 6 months for DMEK (mean = 0.161, SD = 0.129) and DSAEK eye (mean = 0.293, SD = 0.153) conditions; t (297) = 8.042, P < 0.0001. The pooled mean difference was -0.13 (95% confidence interval, -0.16 to -0.09) and I 2 = 44%, indicating better visual acuity for DMEK. Mean postoperative endothelial cell density showed statistically no significant difference in the mean values for DMEK (mean = 1855, SD = 442) and DSAEK eye (mean = 1872, SD = 429) conditions; t (336) = 0.375, P = 0.708. A higher proportion of patients prefer DMEK to DSAEK. However, DSAEK is superior to DMEK with respect to the need for rebubbling as the rebubbling rate was higher in the DMEK group. Conclusions: Although DMEK is associated with a higher rate of rebubbling, better visual outcomes were seen in DMEK. © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Related Docs
Experts (# of related papers)