Back to Search Start Over

Survey of Rejection Prophylaxis Following Suture Removal in Penetrating Keratoplasty in Germany

Authors :
Heinzelmann, Sonja
Boehringer, Daniel
Maier, Philip Christian
Seitz, Berthold
Cursiefen, Claus
Maier, Anna-Karina B.
Dietrich-Ntoukas, Tina
Geerling, Gerd
Viestenz, Arne
Pfeiffer, Norbert
Reinhard, Thomas
Heinzelmann, Sonja
Boehringer, Daniel
Maier, Philip Christian
Seitz, Berthold
Cursiefen, Claus
Maier, Anna-Karina B.
Dietrich-Ntoukas, Tina
Geerling, Gerd
Viestenz, Arne
Pfeiffer, Norbert
Reinhard, Thomas
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Background Penetrating keratoplasty (PK) gets more and more reserved to cases of increasing complexity. In such cases, ocular comorbidities may limit graft survival following PK. A major cause for graft failure is endothelial graft rejection. Suture removal is a known risk factor for graft rejection. Nevertheless, there is no evidence-based regimen for rejection prophylaxis following suture removal. Therefore, a survey of rejection prophylaxis was conducted at 7 German keratoplasty centres. Objective The aim of the study was documentation of the variability of medicinal aftercare following suture removal in Germany. Methods Seven German keratoplasty centres with the highest numbers for PK were selected. The centres were sent a survey consisting of half-open questions. The centres performed a mean of 140 PK in 2018. The return rate was 100%. The findings were tabulated. Results All centres perform a double-running cross-stitch suture for standard PK, as well as a treatment for rejection prophylaxis with topical steroids after suture removal. There are differences in intensity (1-5 times daily) and tapering (2-20 weeks) of the topical steroids following suture removal. Two centres additionally use systemic steroids for a few days. Discussion Rejection prophylaxis following PK is currently poorly standardised and not evidence-based. All included centres perform medical aftercare following suture removal. It is assumed that different treatment strategies show different cost-benefit ratios. In the face of the diversity, a systematic analysis is required to develop an optimised regimen for all patients.

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1312207685
Document Type :
Electronic Resource