Global Search

Search articles, concepts, and chapters

Acta OphthalmolApril 20220 citations

Preventive treatment of allograft rejection after endothelial keratoplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Magnier Florent, Dutheil Frédéric, Pereira Bruno, Watson Stephanie L, Baker Julien S, Chiambaretta Frédéric, Navel Valentin


AI Summary

This meta-analysis found DMEK has lower rejection rates than DSAEK/UT-DSAEK. Soft steroids are a safe, effective alternative to standard steroids for DMEK rejection prevention, reducing ocular hypertension risk.

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of preventive treatment against allograft rejection after endothelial keratoplasty (EK), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Method

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and ScienceDirect databases were searched until May 2021. We computed a random-effect meta-analysis on graft rejection rate stratified by the intervention (i.e. Descemet membrane EK (DMEK) and Descemet stripping (Automated) EK (DS(A)EK) or ultrathin (UT)-DSAEK), and postoperative treatment. Meta-regressions were performed to compare intervention, treatment and influence of putative confusion factors.

Results

We included 49 studies and 12 893 EK (6867 DMEK and 6026 DS(A)EK/UT-DSAEK). Topical steroids were merged in two efficacy regimens: standard steroids (prednisolone acetate 1% or dexamethasone 0.1%) and soft steroids (fluorometholone 0.1% or loteprednol etabonate 0.5%). Globally, DMEK had a lower graft rejection rate than DS(A)EK/UT-DSAEK (coefficient - 3.3, 95 CI, -4.60 to -1.90; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between standard and soft steroids to prevent graft rejection after DMEK. After EK, the rate of ocular hypertension was 20% (95 CI, 14 to 26%) with the use of standard steroids and 7% (5 to 9%) with soft steroids. Comparisons of treatments were not feasible in DS(A)EK/UT-DSAEK due to a lack of studies.

Conclusions

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) has less risk of graft rejection compared with DS(A)EK/UT-DSAEK. Furthermore, soft steroids seemed to be a valuable alternative to standard steroids to prevent graft rejection after DMEK, involving a safe profile against ocular hypertension. Further studies are needed to compare other drugs in the prevention of graft rejection after EK.


MeSH Terms

AllograftsCorneal DiseasesDescemet MembraneDescemet Stripping Endothelial KeratoplastyEndothelium, CornealFuchs' Endothelial DystrophyGlaucomaHumansOcular HypertensionRetrospective StudiesVisual Acuity

Key Concepts4

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) has a lower graft rejection rate than Descemet stripping (Automated) EK (DS(A)EK)/ultrathin (UT)-DSAEK (coefficient -3.3, 95 CI, -4.60 to -1.90; p < 0.001).

Comparative EffectivenessMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review and Meta-Analysisn=49 studies, 12,893 EK (6867 DMEK and …Ch16Ch27

No significant differences were observed between standard steroids (prednisolone acetate 1% or dexamethasone 0.1%) and soft steroids (fluorometholone 0.1% or loteprednol etabonate 0.5%) to prevent graft rejection after DMEK.

Comparative EffectivenessMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review and Meta-Analysisn=49 studies, 12,893 EK (6867 DMEK and …Ch16Ch27Ch29

After endothelial keratoplasty (EK), the rate of ocular hypertension was 20% (95 CI, 14 to 26%) with the use of standard steroids (prednisolone acetate 1% or dexamethasone 0.1%) and 7% (5 to 9%) with soft steroids (fluorometholone 0.1% or loteprednol etabonate 0.5%).

Comparative EffectivenessMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review and Meta-Analysisn=49 studies, 12,893 EK (6867 DMEK and …Ch16Ch24Ch29

Soft steroids (fluorometholone 0.1% or loteprednol etabonate 0.5%) seemed to be a valuable alternative to standard steroids (prednisolone acetate 1% or dexamethasone 0.1%) to prevent graft rejection after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK), involving a safe profile against ocular hypertension.

Comparative EffectivenessMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review and Meta-Analysisn=49 studies, 12,893 EK (6867 DMEK and …Ch16Ch27Ch29

Is this article assigned to the wrong chapter(s)? Let us know.