medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-3070 (Electronic)

2018, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cub Oftal 2018; 31 (2)

Corneal rejection in patients undergoing ophthalmic penetrating keratoplasty

López HSM, Díaz CFM, Gómez CZ, Pérez PZ, Fernández GK, Guerra AM

Language: Spanish
References: 37
Page: 1-13
PDF size: 107.93 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: describe the factors influencing the appearance of graft rejection in patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty during the first year of evolution.
Methods: a retrospective descriptive study was conducted whose universe was composed of all the patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty from January 2010 to January 2014 who developed graft rejection within the first year after surgery. Determination was made of pre- and perioperative factors, time of appearance of the rejection, clinical manifestations and remission with medical treatment.
Results: mean age at presentation was 57.34 years, with a predominance of the male sex and rural origin. Vascularization in recipients exhibited a higher percentage of presentation, followed by previous rejection, aphakia, glaucoma and the use of trephines > 8 mm. The perioperative factors were anterior vitrectomy and pupilloplasty. Bullous keratopathy and post-ulcer leucoma were the most common preoperative diagnoses in rejection cases. The time of appearance of rejection ranged from 7.1 to 10.9 months. The clinical manifestations were visual acuity loss and pain. Rejection remission was 87.50% with a preoperative diagnosis of keratoconus, 81.82 % bullous keratopathy and 80.00 % post-traumatic leucoma.
Conclusions: the most relevant preoperative factors in patients with graft rejection were corneal vascularization, previous rejection, aphakia and glaucoma. The most relevant perioperative factors were anterior vitrectomy and pupilloplasty.


REFERENCES

  1. López Gallego M. Comportamiento clínico de los casos de queratoplastia penetrante realizados en el Centro Nacional de Oftalmología de enero de 2006-2008. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Nicaragua; 2008.

  2. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Clinical approach to corneal dystrophies and metabolic disorders. En: External diseases and cornea. EE.UU.: American Academy of Ophthalmology; 2008. p. 329-52.

  3. Secretaría de Salud. Queratoplastia penetrante. Evidencias y recomendaciones. Catálogo maestro de guías de práctica clínica: IMSS-541-11. México: Secretaría de Salud, 2011 [citado 15 de febrero de 2013]. Disponible en: http://www.cenetec.salud.gob.mx/descargas/gpc/CatalogoMaestro/541_GPC_querato plastiapenetrante/GER_QueratoplastiaPenetrante.pdf

  4. González Pérez MK, Neri Vela R, Quintero Castañón R. El trasplante de córnea en México. Antecedentes históricos. Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2012;86(4):187-90.

  5. Antón M. Notas sobre queratoplastia parcial perforante. Arch Soc Cubana Oftalmol. 1952;II(2):51-4.

  6. Garralda A, Epelde A, Iturralde O, Compains E, Maison C, Altarriba M, et al. Trasplante de córnea. An Sist Sanit Navarra. 2006;29(2):163-74.

  7. Kamp MT. Patient-reported symptoms associated with graft reactions in high risk patients in the collaborative corneal transplantation studies. Cornea. 1995;14(1):43-8.

  8. Sánchez Cornejo M, Olivares Morales OE, Lima Gómez V, Razo-Blanco Hernández DM, Pérez Taibo C. Factores asociados con rechazo a trasplante de córnea, por grupos de pronóstico. Rev Mex Oftalmol. Septiembre-Octubre 2008;82(5):277-80.

  9. Maguire MG, Stark WJ, Gottsch JD, Stuling RD. Risk factors for corneal graft failure and rejection in the collaborative corneal transplantation studies. Ophthalmology. 1994; 101(9):1536-46.

  10. Ríos M, Capote A, Hernández JR, Padilla CM, Eguía F. Oftalmología. Criterios y tendencias actuales. La Habana: Editorial Ciencias Médicas, 2009.

  11. Guzmán Jiménez LK, Beauregard Escobar AM, Ballesteros de la Torre F. Frecuencia de las patologías relacionadas con el rechazo al trasplante de córnea en pacientes con queratoplastia penetrante. Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2006;80(6):325-9.

  12. Sigler-Villanueva AA. Queratoplastia de alto riesgo: a propósito de un caso. Rev Cubana Oftalmol. 2006 [citado 15 de junio de 2017];19(2):[aprox. 2 p.]. Disponible en: http://www.imbiomed.com.mx/1/1/articulos.php?method=showDetail&id_articulo=41 488&id_seccion=895&id_ejemplar=4246&id_revista=73

  13. García EE, Pérez A, Acuña A. Consideraciones inmunológicas sobre el rechazo del trasplante de córnea. Rev Cubana Hematol, Inmunol Hemoter. 2010;26(4);306-14.

  14. Zhang XM, Jiao CN, Jia Z, Ren XJ, Li XR, Zhao SZ. Investigation of the role of mesenchymal stem cells on keratoplasty rejection. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2012;48(8):733-8.

  15. Jia Z, Jiao C, Zhao S, Li X, Ren X, Zhang L, et al. Immunomodulatory effects of mesenchymal stem cells in a rat corneal allograft rejection model. Exp Eye Res. 2012;102:44-9.

  16. Oh JY, Lee RH, Yu JM, Ko JH, Lee HJ, Ko AY, et al. Intravenous mesenchymal stem cells prevented rejection of al logeneic corneal transplants by aborting the early inflammatory response. Mol Ther. 2012;20(11):2143-52.

  17. Sánchez Cornejo M, Olivares Morales OE, Lima Gómez V, Razo- Blanco Hernández DM, Pérez Taibo C. Factores asociados con rechazo a trasplante de córnea, por grupos de pronóstico. Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2008;82(5):277-80.

  18. Yu AL, Kaiser M, Schaumberger M, Messmer E, Kook D, Welge- Lussen U. Perioperative and postoperative risk factors for corneal graft failure. Clinical Ophthalmology. 2014;28(8):1641-7.

  19. Anshu A, Price M, Price FW. Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty under failed penetrating keratoplasty: visual rehabilitation and graft survival rate. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(11):2155-60.

  20. Guzmán Jiménez LK, Beauregard Escobar AM, Ballesteros de la Torre F. Frecuencia de las patologías relacionadas con rechazo a trasplante de córnea en pacientes con queratoplastia penetrante. Rev Mex Oftalmol. 2006;80(6):325-9.

  21. Yu AL, Kaiser M, Schaumberger M, Messmer E, Kook D, Welge- Lussen U. Donorrelated risk factors and preoperative recipient related risk factors for graft failure. Cornea. 2014;33(11):1149-56.

  22. Sánchez M, Nájera ÁG, Razo-Blanco DM, Lima V. Pronóstico anatómico y funcional del trasplante de córnea en pacientes con queratocono al año de seguimiento. Rev Hosp Juár Méx. 2010;77(1):50-3.

  23. Al-Yousuf N. Microbial keratitis in Kingdom of Bahrain: clinical and microbiology study. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2009;16(1):3-7.

  24. Yildiz EH, Abdalla YF, Elsahn AF, Rapuano CJ, Hammersmith KM, Laibson PR, et al. Update on fungal keratitis from 1999 to 2008. Cornea. 2010;29(12):1406-11.

  25. Sánchez Cornejo M, Muñoz-Ibarra P, Razo-Blanco DM, Lima-Gómez V, Albores- Montes O, Mendioza-Contreras JR, et al. Incidencia de rechazo a trasplante de córnea por grupos de pronóstico. Rev Hosp Juár Méx. 2009;76(3):117-21.

  26. Haddadin RI, Chodosh J. Corneal transplantation and glaucoma. Semin Ophthalmol. 2014;29(5-6):380-96.

  27. Price MO, Gorovoy M, Price FW Jr, Benetz BA, Menegay HJ, Lass JH. Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: three-year graft and endothelial cell survival compared with penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(2):246- 51.

  28. Keenan TD, Jones MN, Rushton S, Carley FM, National Health Service Blood and Transplant Ocular Tissue Advisory Group and Contributing Ophthalmologists. Trends in the indications for corneal graft surgery in the United Kingdom: 1999 through 2009. Arch Ophthalmol. 2012;130(5):621-8.

  29. Williams KA, Esterman AJ, Bartlett C, Holland H, Hornsby NB, Coster DJ. How effective is penetrating corneal transplantation? Factors influencing long-term outcome in multivariate analysis. Transplantation. 2006;81(6):896-901.

  30. Vinciguerra P, Albe E, Vinciguerra R, Romano MM, Trazza S, Mastropasqua L, Epstein D. Long-term resolution of immunological graft rejection after a dexamethasone intravitreal implant. Cornea. 2015;34(4):471-4.

  31. Leibowitz HM. Bacterial keratitis. In: Leibowitz HM (Ed). Corneal Disorders: Clinical Diagnosis and Management. Philadelphia: Ed. WB Saunders. 1984. p. 353.

  32. Hong R, Peng Y, Hao H. Postoperation complications analysis and their treatment of Descemet's stripping automated endothelium keratoplasty. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2014;50(4):254-60.

  33. Sánchez Cornejo M, Cruz AS, Razo-Blanco DM, Lima V, Espinoza L. Latencia de rechazo a trasplante corneal por grupo de pronóstico. Rev Hosp Juár Méx. 2010;77(1):59-64.

  34. Mokey MO, Florit D, Suárez R, Pérez RG, Kuri E. Rechazo y retrasplante corneal. Rev Cubana Oftalmol. 2007 [citado 15 de junio de 2017];20(1):[aprox. 2 p.]. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000089&pid=S0121- 0319201200030000300005&lng=en

  35. Shi W, Chen M, Xie L, Liu M, Gao H, Wang T, et al. A novel cyclosporine, a drugdelivery system for prevention of human corneal rejection after high-risk keratoplasty: a clinical study. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(4):695-702.

  36. Saelens IE, Bleyen I, Bartels MC, Van Rij G. A posterior khodadoust line in a graft rejection episode after descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea. 2011;30(2):245-6.

  37. Yildiz EH, Abdalla YF, Elsahn AF, Rapuano CJ, Hammersmith KM, Laibson PR, et al. Update on fungal keratitis from 1999 to 2008. Cornea. 2010;29(12):1406-11.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com