Tear biomarkers for keratoconus

Keratoconus is a progressive corneal thinning, ectatic condition, which affects vision. Recent advances in corneal topography measurements has helped advance proper diagnosis of this condition and increased research and clinical interests in the disease etiopathogenesis. Considerable progress has been achieved in understanding the progression of the disease and tear fluid has played a major role in the progress. This review discusses the importance of tear fluid as a source of biomarker for keratoconus and how advances in technology have helped map the complexity of tears and thereby molecular readouts of the disease. Expanding knowledge of the tear proteome, lipidome and metabolome opened up new avenues to study keratoconus and to identify probable prognostic or diagnostic biomarkers for the disease. A multidimensional approach of analyzing tear fluid of patients layering on proteomics, lipidomics and metabolomics is necessary in effectively decoding keratoconus and thereby identifying targets for its treatment

Cost analysis of mydriasis strategies in cataract surgery care in the Netherlands

PURPOSE: To investigate the economic impact of an intracameral mydriatics and anesthesic agent (ICMA), topical mydriatics, and a mydriatic ocular insert in cataract patients. SETTING: One public hospital in the Netherlands. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Resource use data were collected from a healthcare and societal perspective on the day of surgery. Other outcome parameters included pupil size, surgeon satisfaction, postoperative pain, and Catquest-9SF scores. RESULTS: Mean costs per patient were &OV0556; 506 in the ICMA group (n=122), &OV0556; 474 in the ocular insert group (n=115), and &OV0556; 451 in the topical group (n=131). The acquisition cost of ICMA was highest and resulted in longer surgical time. After correction for an imbalance in the distribution of fast and slow surgeons, mean costs in the ocular insert and topical groups were comparable (&OV0556; 450 versus &OV0556; 444). There was no difference in the use of additional mydriatics intraoperatively (P=0.521).The mean ratio of pupil size to white-to-white distance was lower in the ICMA group during all intraoperative measurements (P<0.001), but similar between the topical and ocular insert groups (P range 0.11-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: In the investigated setting in the Netherlands, ICMA was the most costly strategy. In addition, pupil size was lowest in the ICMA group, but did not result in more additional mydriasis measures intraoperatively. The ocular insert was comparable to topical mydriatics in regard to costs and pupil size. Implementation of ICMA could be considered when availability of nurses or physical space for perioperative care is limited

Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Purpose: To compare best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), endothelial cell density (ECD), refractive astigmatism, and complications after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK). Design: Prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Participants: Fifty-four pseudophakic eyes of 54 patients with corneal endothelial dysfunction resulting from Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy were enrolled in 6 corneal centers in The Netherlands. Methods: Participants were allocated to DMEK (n = 29) or UT-DSAEK (n = 25) using minimization randomization based on preoperative BSCVA, recipient central corneal thickness, gender, age, and institution. Donor corneas were prestripped and precut for DMEK and UT-DSAEK, respectively. Six corneal surgeons participated in this study. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was BSCVA at 12 months after surgery. Results: Central graft thickness of UT-DSAEK lamellae measured 101 mu m (95% confidence interval [CI], 90-112 mu m). Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity did not differ significantly between DMEK and UT-DSAEK groups at 3 months (0.15 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] [95% CI 0.08-0.22 logMAR] vs. 0.22 logMAR [95% CI 0.16-0.27 logMAR]; P = 0.15), 6 months (0.11 logMAR [95% CI 0.05-0.17 logMAR] vs. 0.16 logMAR [95% CI 0.12-0.21 logMAR]; P = 0.20), and 12 months (0.08 logMAR [95% CI 0.03-0.14 logMAR] vs. 0.15 logMAR [95% CI 0.10-0.19 logMAR]; P = 0.06). Twelve months after surgery, the percentage of eyes reaching 20/25 Snellen BSCVA was higher in DMEK compared with UT-DSAEK (66% vs. 33%; P = 0.02). Endothelial cell density did not differ significantly 12 months after DMEK and UT-DSAEK (1870 cells/mm 2 [95% CI 1670-2069 cells/mm(2)] vs. 1612 cells/mm(2) [95% CI 1326-1898 cells/mm(2)]; P = 0.12). Both techniques induced a mild hyperopic shift (12 months: +0.22 diopter [D; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.68 D] for DMEK vs. +0.58 D [95% CI 0.13-1.03 D] for UT-DSAEK; P = 0.34). Conclusions: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and UT-DSAEK did not differ significantly in mean BSCVA, but the percentage of eyes achieving 20/25 Snellen vision was significantly higher with DMEK. Endothelial cell loss did not differ significantly between the treatment groups, and both techniques induced a minimal hyperopic shift. (C) 2020 by the American Academy of Ophthalmolog

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus DSAEK

Purpose: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus standard DSAEK. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using data from a multicentre randomized clinical trial was performed. The time horizon was 12 months postoperatively. Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients with Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy were included and randomized to UT-DSAEK (n = 33) or DSAEK (n = 31). Relevant resources from healthcare and societal perspectives were included in the cost analysis. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were determined using the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 questionnaire. The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; incremental societal costs per QALY). Results: Societal costs were €9431 (US$11 586) for UT-DSAEK and €9110 (US$11 192) for DSAEK. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.74 in both groups. The ICER indicated inferiority of UT-DSAEK. The cost-effectiveness probability ranged from 37% to 42%, assuming the maximum acceptable ICER ranged from €2500–€80 000 (US$3071–US$98 280) per QALY. Additional analyses were performed omitting one UT-DSAEK patient who required a regraft [ICER €9057 (US$11 127) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 44–62$29 271) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 36–59%]. Furthermore, the ICER was €2101 (US$2581) per patient with clinical improvement in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (≥0.2 logMAR) and €3274 (US$4022) per patient with clinical improvement in National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 composite score (≥10 points). Conclusion: The base case analysis favoured DSAEK, since costs of UT-DSAEK were higher while QALYs were comparable. However, additional analyses revealed no preference for UT-DSAEK or DSAEK. Further cost-effectiveness studies are required to reduce uncertainty

Quality of vision and vision-related quality of life after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty:a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE: To compare quality of vision and vision‐related quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) or ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). METHODS: Fifty‐four eyes of 54 patients with Fuchs' dystrophy from six corneal clinics in the Netherlands were randomized to DMEK or ultrathin DSAEK and examined preoperatively, and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures were corneal higher‐order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, straylight and vision‐related QOL. RESULTS: Posterior corneal HOAs decreased after DMEK and increased after ultrathin DSAEK (p ≤ 0.001) 3 months after surgery and correlated positively with best spectacle‐corrected visual acuity (12 months: r = 0.29, p = 0.04). Anterior and total corneal HOAs did not differ significantly between both techniques at any time point. Contrast sensitivity was better (p = 0.01), and straylight was lower (p = 0.01) 3 months after DMEK compared with ultrathin DSAEK; 95% confidence interval [CI] of log(cs) 1.10–1.35 versus 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.12, and 95% CI: log(s) 1.18 to 1.43 versus 95% CI: 1.41 to 1.66, respectively. Both were comparable at later time points. Vision‐related QOL (scale 0–100) did not differ significantly between both groups at any time point and improved significantly at 3 months (β = 12 [95% CI: 7 to 16]; p < 0.001), and subsequently between 3 and 12 months (β = 5 [95% CI: 0 to 9]; p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) results in lower posterior corneal HOAs compared with ultrathin DSAEK. Contrast sensitivity and straylight recover faster after DMEK but reach similar levels with both techniques at 1 year. Vision‐related QOL improved significantly after surgery, but did not differ between both techniques

Development of machine learning models to predict posterior capsule rupture based on the EUREQUO registry

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of different probabilistic classifiers to predict posterior capsule rupture (PCR) prior to cataract surgery. Methods: Three probabilistic classifiers were constructed to estimate the probability of PCR: a Bayesian network (BN), logistic regression (LR) model, and multi‐layer perceptron (MLP) network. The classifiers were trained on a sample of 2 853 376 surgeries reported to the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery (EUREQUO) between 2008 and 2018. The performance of the classifiers was evaluated based on the area under the precision‐recall curve (AUPRC) and compared to existing scoring models in the literature. Furthermore, direct risk factors for PCR were identified by analysing the independence structure of the BN. Results: The MLP network predicted PCR overall the best (AUPRC 13.1 ± 0.41%), followed by the BN (AUPRC 8.05 ± 0.39%) and the LR model (AUPRC 7.31 ± 0.15%). Direct risk factors for PCR include preoperative best‐corrected visual acuity (BCVA), year of surgery, operation type, anaesthesia, target refraction, other ocular comorbidities, white cataract, and corneal opacities. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the MLP network performs better than existing scoring models in the literature, despite a relatively low precision at high recall. Consequently, implementing the MLP network in clinical practice can potentially decrease the PCR rate

Comparison of central corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth measurements using three imaging technologies in normal eyes and after phakic intraocular lens implantation

Contains fulltext : 81835.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The repeatability and interchangeability of imaging devices measuring central corneal thickness (CCT) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) are important in the assessment of patients considering refractive surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the agreement of CCT and ACD measurements using three imaging technologies in healthy eyes and in eyes after phakic intraocular lens implantation (pIOL). METHODS: In this comparative study, CCT and ACD were measured using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), Orbscan II, and Pentacam in 33 healthy volunteers (66 eyes) and 22 patients (42 eyes) after pIOL implantation. Intraobserver repeatability was evaluated for all three devices in the healthy volunteer group. RESULTS: Pairwise comparison of CCT measurements showed significant differences between all devices (P < 0.001), except for the AS-OCT and Orbscan II in the healthy volunteer group (P = 0.422) and the Orbscan II and Pentacam in the pIOL group (P = 0.214). ACD measurements demonstrated significant differences between all pairwise comparisons in both groups (P < or = 0.001). Intraobserver reliability was high for CCT and ACD measurements in the healthy volunteer group, with coefficients of variation ranging from 0.6% to 1.2% and 0.4% to 0.5% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CCT and ACD measurements using AS-OCT, Orbscan II, and Pentacam demonstrated high intraobserver reliability. However, these devices should not be used interchangeably for measurements of CCT and ACD in healthy subject and patients after pIOL implantation