Corneal ectasia following photorefractive keratectomy: a confocal microscopic case report and literature review / Ectasia corneana após ceratectomia fotorrefrativa: relato de caso de microscopia confocal e revisão da literatura

ABSTRACT The occurrence of corneal ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy is a rare but serious complication of refractive surgery. Possible risk factors are not well assessed, but a probable reason is the failure to detect keratoconus preoperatively. In this report, we describe a case of corneal ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy in a patient who presented a suspicious tomography pattern preoperatively but had no degenerative alterations associated with pathologic keratoconus, as revealed by in vivo corneal confocal microscopy. We also review eligible case reports of post-photorefractive keratectomy ectasia to find similar characteristics.

RESUMO A ocorrência de ectasia corneana após ceratectomia fotorrefrativa é uma complicação rara, porém grave, em cirurgia refrativa. Os possíveis fatores de risco não são bem avaliados, mas a opinião atual é que a falha na detecção de ceratocone pré-operatório possa ser o principal motivo. Neste relato, descrevemos um caso de ectasia corneana após ceratectomia fotorrefrativa em paciente apresentando padrão tomográfico suspeito no pré-operatório, mas sem alterações degenerativas associadas a ceratocone patológico, conforme revelado por microscopia confocal in vivo da córnea. Além disso, revisamos, na literatura, relatos de casos elegíveis de ectasia pós-ceratectomia fotorrefrativa para encontrar características semelhantes.

Corneal ectasia following photorefractive keratectomy: a confocal microscopic case report and literature review.

The occurrence of corneal ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy is a rare but serious complication of refractive surgery. Possible risk factors are not well assessed, but a probable reason is the failure to detect keratoconus preoperatively. In this report, we describe a case of corneal ectasia after photorefractive keratectomy in a patient who presented a suspicious tomography pattern preoperatively but had no degenerative alterations associated with pathologic keratoconus, as revealed by in vivo corneal confocal microscopy. We also review eligible case reports of post-photorefractive keratectomy ectasia to find similar characteristics.

Correction methods for noncontact intraocular pressure measurement in patients with keratoconus and healthy individuals / Métodos de correção para medição sem contato da pressão intraocular em indivíduos normais e com ceratocone

ABSTRACT Purpose: The objective of this study was to investigate the usefulness of four different algorithms to correct noncontact intraocular pressure measurement errors in keratoconus patients and normal individuals. Methods: Noncorrected intraocular pressure and corrected intraocular pressures were measured in one eye of 34 patients with keratoconus and 34 age- and gender-matched healthy controls using Corvis Scheimpflug Technology. The correlation of noncorrected intraocular pressure and corrected intraocular pressures with age, axial length, corneal shape, thickness, and biomechanics was calculated. Corrected intraocular pressures were compared with noncorrected intraocular pressure using paired t test and Bland-Altman plots (95% limits of agreement). Results: The noncorrected intraocular pressure correlated with corneal thickness and biomechanical parameters in both groups (all p≤0.047), and front and back mean keratometry in the keratoconus group (r=-0.39, p=0.02, and r=0.39, p=0.02, respectively). After adjustment with different intraocular pressure correction algorithms, biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure showed a minimal correlation with corneal features and a nonsignificant difference with noncorrected intraocular pressure in the healthy group (-0.1 ± 1.1 mmHg, p=0.58; 95% limits of agreement: -2.3 to 2.1 mmHg). Conclusions: Measuring intraocular pressure using noncontact tonometry and its corrected forms with a corneal thickness-based simple linear formula in patients with keratoconus is associated with many errors. Using more complex formulas that take into consideration more corneal stiffness parameters in addition to corneal thickness, such as biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure formula, may be more reliable and beneficial in this group of patients.

RESUMO Objetivo: Investigar a utilidade de quatro algoritmos diferentes para corrigir erros de medição sem contato da pressão intraocular em pacientes saudáveis e com ceratocone. Métodos: A pressão intraocular não corrigida e as pressões intraoculares corrigidas foram medidas em um olho de 34 pacientes com ceratocone e 34 pacientes do grupo controle saudável pareados por idade e gênero usando a tecnologia Corvis Scheimpflug. Foi calculada a correlação da pressão intraocular não corrigida e das pressões intraoculares corrigidas com idade, comprimento axial e formato, espessura e biomecânica da córnea. As pressões intraoculares corrigidas foram comparadas com a pressão intraocular não corrigida usando o teste t pareado, e gráficos de Bland-Altman (limites de concordância de 95%). Resultados: A pressão intraocular não corrigida correlacionou-se com a espessura da córnea e com os parâmetros biomecânicos em ambos os grupos (todos p≤0,047) e a ceratometria média frontal e posterior no grupo com ceratocone (r=-0,39, p=0,02, r=0,39, p=0,02, respectivamente). Após o ajuste com diferentes algoritmos de correção da pressão intraocular, a pressão intraocular corrigida biomecanicamente revelou uma correlação mínima com as características da córnea e uma diferença não significativa com a pressão intraocular não corrigida no grupo saudável (-0,1 ± 1,1 mmHg, p=0,58; limites de concordância de 95%: -2,3 a 2,1 mmHg). Conclusões: A medição da pressão intraocular usando tonometria sem contato e suas formas corrigidas usando fórmulas lineares, simples, baseadas na espessura da córnea em pacientes com ceratocone estão associadas a muitos erros. O uso de fórmulas mais complexas que consideram mais parâmetros de rigidez da córnea além da espessura da córnea, como fórmula de pressão intraocular corrigida biomecanicamente, pode ser mais confiável e benéfico neste grupo de pacientes.

Correction methods for noncontact intraocular pressure measurement in patients with keratoconus and healthy individuals.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate the usefulness of four different algorithms to correct noncontact intraocular pressure measurement errors in keratoconus patients and normal individuals. METHODS: Noncorrected intraocular pressure and corrected intraocular pressures were measured in one eye of 34 patients with keratoconus and 34 age- and gender-matched healthy controls using Corvis Scheimpflug Technology. The correlation of noncorrected intraocular pressure and corrected intraocular pressures with age, axial length, corneal shape, thickness, and biomechanics was calculated. Corrected intraocular pressures were compared with noncorrected intraocular pressure using paired t test and Bland-Altman plots (95% limits of agreement). RESULTS: The noncorrected intraocular pressure correlated with corneal thickness and biomechanical parameters in both groups (all p≤0.047), and front and back mean keratometry in the keratoconus group (r=-0.39, p=0.02, and r=0.39, p=0.02, respectively). After adjustment with different intraocular pressure correction algorithms, biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure showed a minimal correlation with corneal features and a nonsignificant difference with noncorrected intraocular pressure in the healthy group (-0.1 ± 1.1 mmHg, p=0.58; 95% limits of agreement: -2.3 to 2.1 mmHg). CONCLUSIONS: Measuring intraocular pressure using noncontact tonometry and its corrected forms with a corneal thickness-based simple linear formula in patients with keratoconus is associated with many errors. Using more complex formulas that take into consideration more corneal stiffness parameters in addition to corneal thickness, such as biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure formula, may be more reliable and beneficial in this group of patients.

Comparison of transepithelial and conventional photorefractive keratectomy in myopic and myopic astigmatism patients: a randomized contralateral trial.

BACKGROUND: To assess transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) in terms of corneal epithelial healing rate, postoperative pain, postoperative discomfort, and visual and refraction outcomes compared to mechanical epithelial debridement PRK (mPRK) and alcohol-assisted PRK (aaPRK). METHODS: In this double-masked, randomized clinical trial, thirty-nine patients underwent tPRK in one eye and mPRK in the fellow eye (arm A), and 33 patients underwent tPRK in one eye and aaPRK in the contralateral eye (arm B). All surgical procedures were done using the Schwind Amaris excimer laser. The area of corneal epithelial defect in all eyes was captured and analyzed using ImageJ software. RESULTS: Mean epithelial healing time was respectively 3.74 ± 0.82 and 3.59 ± 0.79 days in tPRK versus mPRK (P = 0.21) in arm A, and 3.67 ± 0.92 and 3.67 ± 0.74 days in tPRK versus aaPRK (P = 1.00) in arm B. Accounting for the initial corneal epithelial defect area, the epithelial healing rate was faster in conventional PRK groups compared to tPRK (both P<0.001) in both arms. However, there was no significant difference in safety, efficacy, spherical equivalent refractive accuracy, or corneal haze development between tPRK and conventional PRK groups (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All three methods are effective in terms of visual and refractive outcomes. However, although time to complete re-epithelialization was similar with the three methods, the epithelial healing rate was faster in conventional PRK considering the initial corneal epithelial defect area, and the patients experienced less pain and discomfort in the first postoperative day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT, IRCT20200317046804N1 . Retrospectively registered 5 May 2020.

Dynamic corneal biomechanics in different cell layers: in keratoconus and normal eyes.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the relationship between corneal cellular structures and biomechanical deformation parameters in keratoconic (KC) and healthy eyes. METHODS: In this prospective comparative study, 29 eyes of 29 KC patients were age- and gender-matched with 28 eyes of 28 healthy individuals using frequency matching. Corneal parameters examined included the density of basal epithelial cells, anterior keratocytes, posterior keratocytes and endothelial cells as assessed by in vivo corneal confocal microscopy (HRT III-RCM, Heidelberg Engineering, www.heidelbergengineering.com). Additionally, the coefficient of variation of endothelial cell size (CV) and the percentage of hexagonal endothelial cells (HEX%) were measured by specular microscopy (Konan NSP-9900, Konan Medical, www.konanmedical.com). Further, biomechanical deformation parameters were derived from Corvis Scheimpflug Technology (Corvis ST, Oculus, www.oculus.de). All cellular and biomechanical deformation parameters in KC and normal groups were compared, and the relationship between cellular and biomechanical parameters calculated. RESULTS: In the KC group, the highest concavity (HC) delta arc length and maximum delta arc length were associated with endothelial cell density (Beta = -0.39, p = 0.03 and Beta = -0.60, p Ë‚ 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, there was a significant association between HC deflection length and HEX% (Beta = -0.67, p = 0.001). In the normal group, HC delta arc length and HC deflection length were significantly associated with endothelial cell density (Beta = 0.46, p = 0.02; and Beta = -0.51, p = 0.01, respectively). HC time, HC deformation amplitude and applanation 1 delta arc length were associated with CV (Beta = 0.50, p = 0.01; Beta = 0.27, p = 0.009; and Beta = -0.57, p = 0.002, respectively). Applanation 1 and applanation 2 deformation amplitudes were associated with HEX% (Beta = -0.49, p = 0.005; and Beta = -0.46, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical deformation parameters were significantly correlated with endothelial cell properties in both KC and normal groups, thereby indicating the importance of the integrity of endothelial cells to the biomechanical properties of both KC and normal corneas.

Post-LASIK Ectasia Versus Keratoconus: An In Vivo Confocal Microscopy Study.

PURPOSE: To examine and compare corneal cellular and subbasal nerve (SBN) characteristics in post-laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis ectasia (PLE) corneas, normal post-laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis corneas (PLC), keratoconus (KC) corneas, and normal virgin corneas (NC). METHODS: In this cross-sectional comparative study, 18 PLE eyes of 11 patients, 18 PLC of 15 cases, 32 KC eyes of 32 patients, and 29 NC of 29 subjects were assessed using in vivo confocal microscopy. The density of the basal epithelial cell (BEC), anterior keratocyte, posterior keratocyte, and endothelial cell layers, as well as the characteristics of SBN fibers, was compared between the 4 groups. RESULTS: The density of the BEC and anterior and posterior keratocyte layers was significantly lower in KC compared with NC (-650 ± 190, P = 0.013; -181 ± 39, P < 0.001; and -36 ± 11, P = 0.021, respectively). However, there was no significant difference between PLE and PLC regarding these parameters (all Ps ≥ 0.6). Mean SBN parameters, including central corneal nerve branch density, nerve fiber length, total branch density, and nerve fiber area, were significantly lower in KC compared with NC and in PLE compared with PLC (all Ps ≤ 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: The pathophysiology of PLE seems to differ from KC. Apparent changes in the BEC and anterior and posterior keratocytes associated with KC were not observed in PLE. However, SBNs seem to be involved in both conditions.

Appropriate Sequence of Combined Intracorneal Ring Implantation and Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking in Keratoconus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare surgical sequences of combined intracorneal ring segment (ICRS) implantation and corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in keratoconus and corneal ectasia in terms of visual, refractive, and keratometric outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive electronic search (in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library) was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement to find articles on combined ICRS implantation and CXL in keratoconus and corneal ectasia. The search period was from the inception of the database up to April 2017. Eligible articles were categorized into 3 surgical sequences (same day, ICRS first, and CXL first) and assessed qualitatively. Articles with 12 months of follow-up data after combined surgery were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The initial search identified 120 related articles, of which 17 were included in the review after screening. The quality assessment showed that visual, refractive, and keratometric improvement was observed in all studies in all 3 groups of combined surgery. Meta-analysis on 6 studies that reported 12-month follow-up outcomes showed no significant differences between the 3 groups regarding uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity and cylindrical refractive error. However, results with simultaneous surgery were superior to the CXL-first technique in terms of spherical refractive errors and flat-K (P = 0.011 and P = 0.0001, respectively) and to both CXL first and ICRS first in terms of steep-K (P = 0.002 and P = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous ICRS implantation and CXL may provide better outcomes than staged techniques for improving the corneal shape.

Post-trabeculectomy ocular biometric changes.

Trabeculectomy is the most common surgical procedure for the management of glaucoma, which may significantly influence ocular biometry. Axial length and anterior chamber depth tend to decrease, while crystalline lens and choroidal thickness increase post-operatively. An increase in with-the-rule astigmatism is also observed after the procedure. Such biometric changes affect intraocular lens power calculation even years after the procedure. Non-contact biometric methods and postponing cataract surgery after trabeculectomy could reduce calculation errors associated with surgically induced alterations in ocular biometrics.

Ocular Biometric Changes after Trabeculectomy.

This review article aimed to evaluate ocular biometric changes after trabeculectomy. The PubMed database was searched using the keywords "axial length" (AL), "anterior chamber depth" (ACD), "corneal astigmatism," "corneal topography" and "trabeculectomy." The extracted studies were categorized based on the evaluated parameters and the biometry method (contact and non-contact). Comparable studies with respect to their sample size were combined for statistical analysis. Twenty-five studies including 690 individuals which met the inclusion criteria were selected. After trabeculectomy, a significant and persistent AL reduction, with a range of 0.1-0.19 and 0.1-0.9 mm measured with contact and non-contact methods, respectively, was observed. With respect to topographic changes, 0.38-1.4 diopters (D) with-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism was induced postoperatively. All studies revealed ACD reduction immediately after surgery, which gradually deepened and approximated its preoperative levels on day 14. ACD reduction was not significant after that period in the majority of cases. In conclusion, changes in ACD is of small amount and of short period, thus it can be ignored; however, reported changes in AL and keratometry are of sufficient magnitude and can affect the refractive prediction of combined cataract surgery and trabeculectomy.

Biometric Changes After Trabeculectomy with Contact and Non-contact Biometry.

PURPOSE: To compare biometric changes measured with contact and noncontact methods after mitomycin-C-augmented trabeculectomy. METHODS: In this prospective study, 31 eyes from 31 glaucoma patients scheduled for primary trabeculectomy were enrolled. Biometric parameters including axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and lens thickness (LT) were measured using contact ultrasound biometry (UD-6000 Ultrasonic A/B scanner biometer; Tomey Corporation, Nagoya, Japan) and a noncontact optical biometry device (Lenstar; Haag-Streit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland). Measurements were taken the day before trabeculectomy and then compared with measurements obtained 3 and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: The AL and ACD were significantly decreased at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline values taken with each biometry method. There was a significant increase in LT measured by the Lenstar device at the 3- and 6-month follow-up. At both the 3- and 6-month follow-up, the mean AL measurement reduction with the Lenstar device was significantly lower than that of the A-scan ultrasound measurements. The mean ACD changes between the two devices were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: There is a small but significant decrease in the AL and ACD after trabeculectomy as measured with both the contact and noncontact methods. The amount of AL reduction measured is significantly smaller using the noncontact method, making it the preferable method for intraocular lens power calculation for patients who need cataract surgery combined with or after trabeculectomy. The LT measured by the Lenstar device increased significantly after the operation, which can be an early sign of the progression of cataractous changes after trabeculectomy.

Intraocular lens power changes after mitomycin trabeculectomy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate biometric changes after mitomycin C augmented trabeculectomy and their effect on intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using different formulas. METHODS: In this prospective, interventional case series study, 34 eyes of 31 phakic glaucoma patients who were scheduled for primary trabeculectomy were enrolled. Using a noncontact biometry device (Lenstar, Haag-Streit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland), axial length (AL), mean corneal power, and IOL power were calculated with the Hoffer Q, Holladay, and SRK/T formulas 1 day before surgery and compared to those obtained 3 and 6 months after the operation. Bland-Altman plot was used to determine agreement between preoperative and postoperative IOL power values. RESULTS: The AL was significantly decreased at month 3 (-0.14 ± 0.13 mm) and month 6 (-0.14 ± 0.15 mm) as compared to baseline values (both p values <0.001). Mean corneal power increased significantly at month 3 (0.41 ± 0.46 D; p<0.001) and month 6 (0.27 ± 0.47 D; p = 0.008). Using different formulas, IOL power did not change significantly after the operation (all ps≥0.17). The IOL power changes using the Hoffer Q formula were -0.09 ± 0.76 (p = 0.505) and 0.14 ± 0.9 D (p = 0.442) at 3 and 6 months, respectively; corresponding values were -0.1 ± 0.75 (p = 0.427) and 0.16 ± 0.79 D (p = 0.319) for Holladay and 0.01 ± 0.64 (p = 0.895) and 0.2 ± 0.71 D (p = 0.17) employing the SRK/T formula. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant changes in AL and corneal power after trabeculectomy, IOL power calculation remains unchanged; therefore adjustment of IOL power calculation after trabeculectomy seems unnecessary.