Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1741
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 68  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 266

Comments on: Keratoprosthesis optic and carrier corneal graft “noncontact” as a cause of sterile stromal necrosis in a case of Auro KPro implantation


Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier De l'Université De Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Date of Web Publication19-Dec-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mona Harissi-Dagher
CHUM, Department of Ophthalmology, 1051, Rue Sanguinet, Local D.01.2273, Montréal (Québec), H2X 3E4
Canada
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1201_19

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Harissi-Dagher M, Awad Y. Comments on: Keratoprosthesis optic and carrier corneal graft “noncontact” as a cause of sterile stromal necrosis in a case of Auro KPro implantation. Indian J Ophthalmol 2020;68:266

How to cite this URL:
Harissi-Dagher M, Awad Y. Comments on: Keratoprosthesis optic and carrier corneal graft “noncontact” as a cause of sterile stromal necrosis in a case of Auro KPro implantation. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2020 [cited 2020 Jan 18];68:266. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2020/68/1/266/273182



We read with interest the recently published article by Malhotra et al. about the case of a 50-year-old woman with bilateral, vascularized corneal opacity and associated limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) for which she underwent primary implantation of Auro keratoprosthesis (KPro).[1] KPro was developed to enhance surgical alternatives to the traditional penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Despite better postoperative management and refinement of its design, corneal melting is still a potential complication of Kpro, negatively impacting the prognosis because of its potential impact on visual rehabilitation.[2],[3] Hence, we felt it is important to draw attention to the causes of keratolysis following KPro implantation.

Malhotra et al. reported about an area of noncontact observed between the optic front plate and the carrier graft of the Kpro, and they thought it to be conducive to tissue necrosis and ulceration. We would like to elaborate on this, as there are more common causes that have to be evoked. Our study comprised a large cohort of patients with Boston KPro type I, identified the incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of keratolysis over a long-term follow-up.[3] In our large cohorts of melts post KPro, the senior author (MH-D) observed that sixteen (14%) of the 110 eyes (96 patients) who underwent KPro implantation developed keratolysis at an average 20 months. Retroprosthetic membrane (RPM) and infectious keratitis were identified in 31% and 25%, respectively and confirmed as significant risk factors. Other melts occurred in the setting of corneal dellen/desiccation (13%) as found in Malhotra's case report or were idiopathic (25%). Patients with keratolysis had higher complication rates and should receive rigorous monitoring. In fact, retinal and choroidal detachment were more common in eyes with keratolysis.[4],[5] Corneal melt may also lead to KPro extrusion, placing the anatomical integrity and function of the globe at risk.[4]

Although the incidence rate of corneal melting has been significantly reduced, sterile keratolysis continues to be a significant complication associated with poor visual outcomes and appears more prevalent with longer follow-up. Furthermore, the improvement in the KPro design and development of a safe mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) inhibitor for prophylaxis and treatment are warranted to maximize KPro retention.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Malhotra C, Dhingra D, Jain AK. Keratoprosthesis optic and carrier corneal graft “noncontact” as a cause of sterile stromal necrosis in a case of Auro KPro implantation. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2019;67:685-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Bouhout S, Robert MC, Deli S, Harissi-Dagher M. Corneal melt after Boston keratoprosthesis: Clinical presentation, management, outcomes and risk factor analysis. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2018;26:693-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Robert MC, Dohlman CH. A review of corneal melting after Boston keratoprosthesis. Semin Ophthalmol 2014;29:349-57.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Chan CC, LoVerde L, Qiang J, Nordlund ML, Holland EJ. Incidence, risk factors, and surgical management of Boston type 1 keratoprothesis corneal melts, leaks, and extrusions. Cornea 2016;35:1049-56.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Ciolino JB, Belin MW, Todani A, Al-Arfaj K, Rudnisky CJ. Boston Keratoprosthesis Type 1 Study Group. Retention of the Boston keratoprosthesis type 1: Multicenter study results. Ophthalmology 2013;120:1195-200.  Back to cited text no. 5
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed88    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded24    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal