Donor and Recipient Sex Matching and Corneal Graft Failure in High-Risk and Non-High-Risk Patients

Purpose. It is controversial whether donor-recipient sex mismatch is a risk factor associated with corneal graft failure. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of sex mismatch on corneal graft failure in high-risk and non-high-risk patients. Design. A retrospective study. Methods. The medical charts of patients who underwent corneal transplantations by one surgeon between 2012 and 2017 were reviewed. Patients were defined as high-risk for failure if they had glaucoma, ocular surface disease, or corneal vascularization. Graft failure rates were compared using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves between sex matched and mismatched subjects and between male-to-female grafting and other patients. Results. One hundred and thirteen patients with a minimum follow-up of 18 months were included. In 62 non-high-risk patients, graft failure rates were similar between the sex mismatched and the sex matched recipients (p=0.645, log-rank) and in male donor to female recipient transplantations and in the other transplantations (p=0.496, log-rank). Analysis of fifty-one eyes of 51 high-risk graft recipients (mean age of 73.4 +/- 12.7 years, N = 26 females) showed that graft failure rates were significantly higher in the sex mismatched than sex matched recipients (p=0.022, log-rank) and in male donor to female recipient transplantations than in the other transplantations (p=0.002, log-rank). Conclusions. Sex matching for every patient bares logistic difficulties; however, in patients who are at high-risk for graft failure, it may be a simple way to improve outcomes and better utilize corneal grafts.Peer reviewe

OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY BIOMARKERS TO DISTINGUISH DIABETIC MACULAR EDEMA FROM PSEUDOPHAKIC CYSTOID MACULAR EDEMA USING MACHINE LEARNING ALGORITHMS.

PURPOSE In diabetic patients presenting with macular edema (ME) shortly after cataract surgery, identifying the underlying pathology can be challenging and influence management. Our aim was to develop a simple clinical classifier able to confirm a diabetic etiology using few spectral domain optical coherence tomography parameters. METHODS We analyzed spectral domain optical coherence tomography data of 153 patients with either pseudophakic cystoid ME (n = 57), diabetic ME (n = 86), or "mixed" (n = 10). We used advanced machine learning algorithms to develop a predictive classifier using the smallest number of parameters. RESULTS Most differentiating were the existence of hard exudates, hyperreflective foci, subretinal fluid, ME pattern, and the location of cysts within retinal layers. Using only 3 to 6 spectral domain optical coherence tomography parameters, we achieved a sensitivity of 94% to 98%, specificity of 94% to 95%, and an area under the curve of 0.937 to 0.987 (depending on the method) for confirming a diabetic etiology. A simple decision flowchart achieved a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 95%, and an area under the curve of 0.937. CONCLUSION Confirming a diabetic etiology for edema in cases with uncertainty between diabetic cystoid ME and pseudophakic ME was possible using few spectral domain optical coherence tomography parameters with high accuracy. We propose a clinical decision flowchart for cases with uncertainty, which may support the decision for intravitreal injections rather than topical treatment