Clinical and functional features of penetrating keratoplasty in the Kingdom of Jordan. A single-center experience
https://doi.org/10.15825/1995-1191-2020-4-65-68
Abstract
Objective: to determine the indications for penetrating keratoplasty (PK) in the Kingdom of Jordan and evaluate
its clinical and functional outcomes.
Materials and methods. 213 patients underwent PK at the ophthalmology department of King Abdullah University Hospital (KAUH) in Jordan from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018. While 196 (92.2%) patients were operated on in one eye, 17 (8.8%) underwent PK in both eyes. For all patients, the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was checked using the Snellen table and compared with the BCVA before surgery; biomicroscopy of the anterior segment of the eye, as well as applanation tonometry, were carried out.
Results. Keratoconus was found to be the most common indication for PK – 154 patients (73.2%). For all patients, the BCVA improved from 0.08 before surgery to 0.25 after surgery.
Conclusion. Keratoconus is the most common indication for PK in both men (97, 71.3%, p < 0.05) and women (57, 74%, p < 0.05) in the Kingdom of Jordan. PK is an effective method for treating various corneal disorders.
About the Authors
M. A. Tanash
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
21/3, Miklukho-Maklaya str., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation.
Phone: (985) 199-69-24
M. A. Frolov
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Moscow
Russian Federation
Moscow
P. A. Gonchar
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Moscow
Russian Federation
Moscow
G. N. Dushina
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Moscow
Russian Federation
Moscow
L. T. Ababneh
Jordan University of Science and Technology, King Abdullah University Hospital
Russian Federation
Irbid
Russian Federation
Irbid
References
1. Burton M. Corneal Blindness; Prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation. Comm Eye Health. 2009; 22: 33–35. Retrieved from http://www.cehjournal.org/wpcontent/uploads/corneal-blindness.pdf.
2. Oliva MS, Schottman T, Gulati M. Turning the tide of corneal blindness. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2012 Sep-Oct; 60: 423–427. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.100540.
3. Koplin RS, Wu EI, Ritterband DC, Seedor JA. Corneal Transplantation: Penetrating Keratoplasty. In The Scrub’s Bible. New York, NY: Springer, 2013. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5644-5_26.
4. Zirm EK. Eine erfolgreiche totale keratoplastik (A successful total keratoplasty). Refract Corneal Surg. 1906; 5 (4): 258–261.
5. Zare M, Javadi MA, Einollahi B, Karimian F, Rafie AR, Feizi S, Azimzadeh A. Changing indications and surgical techniques for corneal transplantation between 2004 and 2009 at a tertiary referral center. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2012; 19: 323–329. doi: 10.4103/0974-9233.97941.
6. Tan DT, Janardhanan P, Zhou H, Chan YH, Htoon HM, Ang LP, Lim LS. Penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes: the Singapore Corneal Transplant Study. Ophthalmology. 2008; 115: 975–982. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.08.049.
7. Zhang C, Xu J. Indications for penetrating keratoplasty in East China, 1994–2003. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005; 243: 1005–1009. doi: 10.1007/s00417-005-1167-0.
8. Majander A, Kivelä TT, Krootila K. Indications and outcomes of keratoplasties in children during a 40-year period. Acta Ophthalmol. 2016; 94: 618–624. doi: 10.1111/aos.13040.
9. Altay Y, Burcu A, Aksoy G, Ozdemir ES, Ornek F. Changing indications and techniques for corneal transplantations at a tertiary referral center in Turkey, from 1995 to 2014. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016; 10: 1007–1013. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S102315.
10. Flores VG, Dias HL, de Castro RS. Penetrating keratoplasty indications in «Hospital das Clínicas-UNICAMP». Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2007; 70: 505–508. doi: 10.1590/s0004-27492007000300020.
11. Trufanov SV, Subbot AM, Malozhen SA, Krakhmaleva DA, Salovarova EP. Corneal Graft Rejection after Keratoplasty. Ophthalmology in Russia. 2017; 14 (3): 180–187. [In Russ, English abstract]. doi: 10.18008/1816-5095-2017-3-180-187.
12. Krumeich JH, Daniel J, Knulle A. Live-epikeratophakia for keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24: 456–463. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(98)80284-8.
13. www.eyebank.com.jo [Internet]. Jordan, Amman: Jordan Eye Bank, [cited 2019 Oct 9]. Available from: http://www.eyebank.com.jo/.
14. Gharaibeh A, Atasi M, Alfoqahaa M, AbuKhader I. Visual outcome of allogenic penetrating keratoplasty. Jordan Med J. 2017; 51 (4): 147–157. https://journals.ju.edu.jo/JMJ/article/view/100898.
15. Yorston D, Wood M, Foster A. Penetrating keratoplasty in Africa: graft survival and visual outcome. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996; 80: 890–894. doi: 10.1136/bjo.80.10.890.
16. Vieira Silva J, Júlio de Faria e Sousa S, Mafalda Ferrante A. Corneal transplantation in a developing country: problems associated with technology transfer from rich to poor societies. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006; 84: 396–400. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2006.00663.x.
Review
For citations:
Tanash M.A., Frolov M.A., Gonchar P.A., Dushina G.N., Ababneh L.T. Clinical and functional features of penetrating keratoplasty in the Kingdom of Jordan. A single-center experience. Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs. 2020;22(4):65-68. https://doi.org/10.15825/1995-1191-2020-4-65-68
Views:
691
Email this article 