Logo image
Long-term comparison of epikeratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Long-term comparison of epikeratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus

Roger F Steinert and Michael D Wagoner
Archives of ophthalmology (1960), Vol.106(4), pp.493-496
04/1988
DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1988.01060130539031
PMID: 3281642

View Online

Abstract

The results of epikeratoplasty for keratoconus in ten patients with long-term follow-up (mean, 25 months; range, 19 to 31 months) vs ten patients with contemporaneous penetrating keratoplasty for keratoconus (mean, 33 months; range, three to 81 months) indicate a similar level of postoperative spectacle visual acuity (20/32 vs 20/27, respectively) and similar refractive and keratometric results. The healing period until achieving best corrected visual acuity averaged 12 months for epikeratoplasty vs three months for penetrating keratoplasty. Compared with penetrating keratoplasty, epikeratoplasty offers the advantages of maintaining an intact globe surgically and postoperatively in a young, active population, while avoiding potential immune rejection. The major disadvantages are a prolonged healing period and undefined limits in the extent of the cone that would define suitable candidates preoperatively.
Corneal Transplantation Keratoconus - therapy Contact Lenses Follow-Up Studies Humans Cornea - pathology Keratoconus - pathology Visual Acuity Postoperative Complications Methods Keratoconus - physiopathology

Details

Metrics

Logo image