Use of Endoscopy in Keratoprostheses with Biological Haptics. / Endoskopieeinsatz bei Keratoprothesen mit biologischer Haptik.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In severe ocular surface disease where penetrating keratoplasty cannot be successfully performed, implantation of a keratoprosthesis can achieve visual rehabilitation. Osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis offers good tissue integration due to its biological haptics, resulting in a better survival rate and lower extrusion rate. Due to corneal opacity, which is often complete, assessing the potential visual acuity is challenging. Also, during implantation of a keratoprosthesis or during later intraocular revision surgery, there is a limited field of view of the peripheral retina or ciliary body region. This is due to the small size and central location of the prosthesis optics and the geometric conditions of the prosthetic haptics. These factors can complicate surgery. METHODS: Endoscopic video assistance was used in 7 eyes of 6 different patients (6 male, 2 female, mean age 66 ± 9 years). In 3 eyes the indication was for preoperative estimation of potential visual acuity during a 23 G vitrectomy. In 2 eyes it was used during implantation surgery itself, and in 2 eyes it was used during revision surgery and vitrectomy. An endoscope with semirigid optics and an image guidance system with 3,000 pixels and 70°field of view from PolyDiagnost was used, with a 23 G trocar system. RESULTS: Endoscopy was successfully applied in all eyes examined. In 1 of 3 eyes where endoscopy was performed to estimate the visual acuity potential, a keratoprosthesis was subsequently planned. In the other two eyes, the visual acuity potential was rated insufficient for future keratoprosthesis surgery. Detailed assessment of the retina and optic disc was limited to gross pathologies because of low image resolution. During implantation, it was possible to visualize correct positioning of the posterior haptic behind the host cornea. Retroprosthetic membranes could successfully be removed by endoscopy-assisted vitrectomy. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy assistance offers advantages in visualization both for determining the indication for KPro surgery, during implantation, and in the management of complications after implantation of a keratoprosthesis. Low resolution of the imaging system places limits on assessment capabilities. Although technical improvements and miniaturization may enhance its future capabilities, endoscopy in its current form is already a valuable addition in the context of keratoprosthesis surgery.