Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The British Journal of Ophthalmology logoLink to The British Journal of Ophthalmology
. 1991 Mar;75(3):142–146. doi: 10.1136/bjo.75.3.142

Penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus: complications and long-term success.

K W Sharif 1, T A Casey 1
PMCID: PMC1042291  PMID: 1826453

Abstract

A series of 100 penetrating keratoplasties for keratoconus performed between 1968 abd 1986 were reviewed for long-term results. The mean follow-up was 6.1 years with a range of 4-16 years. The systemic associations and the postoperative complications were analysed. Grafting in cases associated with Down's syndrome had a higher incidence of complications. 93% of grafts remained clear and 81% achieved a final corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or better. 21% of eyes developed a homograft reaction, with 50% of rejection episodes occurring in the first year after operation. Factors associated with higher incidence of rejection included loose sutures, traumatic wound dehiscence, and grafts larger than 8.5 mm. Only three grafts with rejection episodes lost graft clarity, while rejection in the rest was successfully reversed with topical steroid therapy. No relationship was found between donor age and long-term graft clarity.

Full text

PDF
142

Images in this article

143Image
on p.143
143Image
on p.143

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Abbott R. L., Forster R. K. Determinants of graft clarity in penetrating kerotoplasty. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979 Jun;97(6):1071–1075. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1979.01020010525001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chandler J. W., Kaufman H. E. Graft reactions after keratoplasty for keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 1974 Apr;77(4):543–547. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(74)90469-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Culbertson W. W., Abbott R. L., Forster R. K. Endothelial cell loss in penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 1982 Jun;89(6):600–604. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(82)34754-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Davies P. D., Ruben M. The paretic pupil: its incidence and aetiology after keratoplasty for keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 1975 Apr;59(4):223–228. doi: 10.1136/bjo.59.4.223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ehlers N., Olsen T. Long term results of corneal grafting in keratoconus. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1983 Oct;61(5):918–926. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1983.tb01474.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Forster R. K., Fine M. Relation of donor age to success in penetrating keratoplasty. Arch Ophthalmol. 1971 Jan;85(1):42–47. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1971.00990050044007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Keates R. H., Falkenstein S. Keratoplasty in keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 1972 Sep;74(3):442–444. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(72)90905-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Paglen P. G., Fine M., Abbott R. L., Webster R. G., Jr The prognosis for keratoplasty in keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 1982 Jun;89(6):651–654. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(82)34753-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. URRETS ZAVALIA A., Jr FIXED, DILATED PUPIL, IRIS ATROPHY AND SECONDARY GLAUCOMA. Am J Ophthalmol. 1963 Aug;56:257–265. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(63)91861-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of Ophthalmology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES