Indications and outcome of repeat penetrating keratoplasty in India

BACKGROUND: Repeat penetrating keratoplasty is quite often required as there is high chance of failure of the primary graft particularly in the developing world. We planned a study to analyze the indications and outcome of repeat penetrating keratoplasty in a tertiary care centre in India. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all the patients who underwent repeat penetrating keratoplasty, between January 1999 and December 2001 was performed. The parameters evaluated were indication for the primary penetrating keratoplasty, causes of failure of the previous graft, and final visual outcome and clarity of the repeat corneal grafts. RESULTS: Of fifty-three eyes of 50 patients with repeat penetrating keratoplasty (three patients underwent bilateral corneal regrafts), 37 eyes had undergone one regraft each, 14 eyes two regrafts and two eyes had three regrafts. The follow-up of the patients ranged from one to three years. The most common primary etiologic diagnosis was vascularized corneal scars (66%), of which the scars related to infection were most common (68.5%). Twenty-eight regrafts (52.8%) remained clear at a mean follow-up of 1.54 ± 0.68 years, of which 25 were single regrafts (89.3%). The commonest cause of failure of regraft was infection to the corneal graft (recurrence of herpetic infection in 9 eyes and perforated graft ulcers in 3 eyes). Three (18.6%) of the 16 eyes with multiple corneal regrafts achieved a BCVA of 6/60. Overall, only five eyes (all with single regraft) achieved a BCVA of 6/18 or better at the end of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Graft infection is the leading cause of failure of repeat keratoplasty in this part of the world. Prognosis for visual recovery and graft survival is worse in eyes undergoing multiple regrafts

Mitomycin C for pterygium: long term evaluation

Aim: To evaluate long term complications after pterygium excision with mitomycin C (MMC) application. Design: Prospective non-comparative interventional case series. Participants: Ninety nine patients who underwent pterygium surgery and participated in a controlled study for efficacy of MMC for pterygium surgery between 1989 and 1994. Methods: Patients who were located and agreed to come for examination underwent a complete eye examination. The bare sclera area, in particular, was examined for possible complications. The main outcome measures were anatomical findings in area of MMC application. Results: Forty three eyes of 43 patients were examined. Sixty three per cent of patients had pterygium surgery with intraoperative application of 0.02% MMC for 5 minutes and 37% of patients received MMC 1% or 2% drops four times daily for 2 weeks postoperatively. In three patients, pterygium recurred within 18 months. The only complication was mild conjunctival avascularity in areas of pterygium excision in 30% of patients. Conclusion: Long term evaluation revealed that the use of MMC in pterygium surgery is safe, but for a strict selection of patients, controlled use of MMC and long term follow up are required

To lift or recut: changing trends in LASIK enhancement.

PURPOSE: To report serious complications caused by recutting laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) flaps for enhancement and reconsider the current preferred method of LASIK enhancement. SETTING: Multiple surgeon practices. METHODS: This retrospective noncomparative nonconsecutive case series comprised LASIK patients in the private practices of 9 experienced refractive surgeons and those reported in a survey of refractive surgeons. Case histories, refractions, corneal topographies, slitlamp photographs, and measurements of uncorrected and best corrected (BCVA) visual acuity after recutting LASIK flaps were collected. Surveys of refractive surgeons and an analysis of changing practice trends among the authors and these surgeons were assessed. RESULTS: In 12 cases, significant loss of BCVA and subjective visual difficulties resulted from recutting LASIK flaps. Most surveyed surgeons had changed their practice from recutting to lifting flaps even 9 to 10 years postoperatively with good results. CONCLUSION: Recutting flaps for enhancement should be avoided unless other alternatives are unavailable