A 15-year-old boy was referred for corneal opacity evaluation. The patient had a previous herpes zoster virus (HZV) infection-varicella-zoster virus (VZV)-with ocular manifestation 1 year ago. After the infection, he developed a central corneal scar and decreased corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) in the right eye. The slitlamp examination showed the right eye with central corneal opacity (involving anterior stroma), lacuna area between the haze, fluorescein negative, and no vascularization near the scar (Figure 1JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202406000-00019/figure1/v/2024-07-10T174224Z/r/image-tiff). The patient had been treated with oral valacyclovir and topical corticosteroids without any improvement of visual acuity or changes in opacity within the 1-year follow-up. His CDVA was 20/200 (-4.50 -0.75 × 25) in the right eye and counting fingers (-4.00) in the left eye. Intraocular pressure was 12 mm Hg in both eyes. Fundoscopy was normal in the right eye, but he had a macular scar in the left eye (diagnosed when he was 7 years). The left eye had no cornea signs. The patient has no comorbidity or previous surgeries. Considering this case, a corneal central scar in a 15-year-old boy, legally single eye only, and assuming it is an opacity in the anterior stroma, would you consider surgery for this patient? If so, which would you choose: Would you consider an excimer laser treatment of his ametropia while partially removing his opacity, a phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK), or a PTK followed by a topography-guided treatment, femtosecond laser-assisted anterior lamellar keratoplasty (FALK), or deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) or penetrating keratoplasty (depending on the scar depth)? Would you consider prophylactic acyclovir during and after surgery? Would you consider any other surgical step to prevent delayed corneal healing-persistent epithelial defect? Before the surgical approach, would you consider treating this patient with topical losartan (a transforming growth factor [TGF]-β signaling inhibitor)? Would you first perform the surgery (which one) and then start the medication? Furthermore, if so, how long would you treat this patient? Would you consider treatment with another medication?

We present the case of a 65-year-old man with bilateral keratoconus and history of bilateral penetrating keratoplasty (PK) who developed gradual visual decline in the left eye due to cataract formation. Following successful left eye cataract surgery and monofocal, non-toric intraocular lens (IOL) in-the-bag implantation, the patient experienced persistently low uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) due to high residual refractive error and intolerance to contact lenses. A supplementary toric IOL was placed in the ciliary sulcus, but subsequent rotational instability of the lens required repeated realignment. Despite two attempts at IOL repositioning, the rotational instability persisted, necessitating the replacement of the original Sulcoflex IOL with a toric, implantable Collamer lens. Following the implantation of the toric ICL, the patient achieved excellent UDVA with no adverse events over a 4-year follow-up period. This case highlights the potential rotational instability associated with toric piggyback IOLs in keratoconic, post-PK, pseudophakic eyes and the special considerations on choosing the type of piggyback lens in these eyes.

To evaluate the impact of excimer laser-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (Exc-DALK) and excimer laser-assisted penetrating keratoplasty (Exc-PKP) on subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) in eyes with advanced keratoconus. A retrospective comparative clinical study, which compares the outcomes of 24 eyes treated with Exc-DALK (G1) against matched group of 43 eyes treated with Exc-PKP (G2) at both 2 months (T1) and 2 years (T2) postoperatively. Main outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and SFCT. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences between both groups regarding BCVA, CMT or SFCT (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences between both groups regarding BCVA at both follow-ups (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences between both groups regarding CMT at both follow-ups (p > 0.05). SFCT was higher in G2 than G1 at both follow-ups (p < 0.01). Compared to preoperative SFCT, there were no significant changes in SFCT in G1 at both follow-ups (p > 0.05). In G2, SFCT increased significantly at T1 (p < 0.01) and did not differ significantly at T2 (p = 0.17). SFCT increased significantly after Exc-PKP but not after Exc-DALK, which might indicate that Exc-DALK affects the choroid less and thus could represent a less traumatic approach to ocular tissue than Exc-PKP.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between donor-related factors and the risk of rejection in patients undergoing penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) for keratoconus.
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of keratoconus patients with no corneal neovascularization who underwent PKP from November 2014 to December 2016 and completed at least two years of follow-up. Preoperative, donor, operative, and postoperative data were collected and analyzed to identify factors leading to corneal graft rejection.
RESULTS: A total of 201 eyes (of 201 patients) that underwent PKP for keratoconus were included. Of these, 22.9% (95% CI 17.6-29.2%) had an episode of graft rejection. The overall graft survival rate was 98.5%. Receipts with a history of corneal transplant in the fellow eye (IRR 1.69, 95% CI 1.01, 2.80; p = 0.044) and those with postoperative stromal neovascularization (IRR 2.51, 95% CI 1.49, 4.21; p = 0.001) had a significantly higher incidence of rejection than those without these features. In univariate analysis, death-to-surgery time and death-to-excision time (DET) showed a weak association with graft rejection (p 0.05 and 0.08 respectively); However, in the multivariable analysis, this significance was lost. Grafts with a death-to-excision time (DET) greater than 8 h had a 0.53X lower risk of rejection compared with grafts with DET within 8 h or less (p = 0.05). Rejection was higher in patients receiving grafts with a preservation time within 7 days or less compared with preservation time greater than 7 days (30.6% vs. 21.2%, respectively, p = 0.291).
CONCLUSIONS: In the multivariable analysis, none of the donor-related factors were significantly associated with graft rejection; however, short death-to-surgery time may be associated with rejection after PKP. Recipients with a history of PKP in the fellow eye and those who developed corneal neovascularization were also at increased risk of developing rejection after keratoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery in patients after penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) is often challenging because of changes in corneal structure induced by PKP and primary corneal disease. Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery offers several advantages over conventional phacoemulsification, and has been widely used in complicated cataract surgery.
METHODS: We report the use of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery in 3 challenging cases after penetrating keratoplasty. Case 1 involved a patient with hard nuclear grade IV° cataract. After surgery, his corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) improved from 20/400 to 20/25, and the endothelial cell loss (ECL) % was 12.05 % at 3 months postoperatively. The rotation of the toric IOL in Case 1 was 2°. Case 2 involved a patient with severe nuclear cataract and an endothelial cell density of 837 cells/mm2. After surgery, the CDVA improved from 20/100 to 20/40. The ECL% was 4.06% at 1 week postoperatively. Case 3 was a 91-year-old woman with a short axis length of 21.35 mm and an endothelial cell density number of 1238 cells/mm2. After surgery, the CDVA improved from light perception to 20/133, and the ECL% was 26.09% at 1 week postoperatively; ECL% was 2.67% at 1 month post-operation. The corneal grafts were transparent.
CONCLUSIONS: Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery seems to be an effective, predictable, and safe approach for challenging patients after PKP, and improves visual recovery and optimal refractive outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of rejection is 10-30% in penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) case, and the rate is higher in cases of high-risk patients. Although using topical corticosteroids is a standard method for management the rejection of post-PKP patients, it may not be sufficiently potent in high-risk patients. Topical administration of tacrolimus (TAC) may be effective in suppression rejection after corneal transplantation. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of topical TAC in high-risk PKP patients in Japan.
METHODS: This study was a single centre, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Patients with a history of PKP, graft rejection, atopic dermatitis, or deep corneal neovascularisation who underwent PKP were enrolled. They were randomly assigned to receive 0.1% TAC ophthalmic suspension or artificial tear (AT) up to week 52 after surgery. All participants received 0.1% betamethasone up to week 13 after surgery then they received 0.1% fluorometholone up to week 52. The incidence of immunological rejection during the observation period was the main outcome measure in this study.
RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled in this study, and 12 eyes in the TAC group and 13 eyes in the AT group completed the study, respectively. Five out of 30 patients discontinued participation after providing informed consent. No serious adverse effects were developed in patients who received 0.1% TAC ophthalmic suspension. No rejection episodes occurred in the TAC group, while one eye in the AT group had rejection. Graft clarity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and corneal endothelial cell density were not significantly different between the TAC and AT groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated that good tolerability of 0.1% TAC ophthalmic suspension. However, we failed to demonstrate its efficacy in preventing immunological rejection in high-risk patients undergoing PKP.
BACKGROUND: This study was first registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000029669, Date of registration: November 1, 2017). With the enforcement of the Clinical Trial Act in Japan, the study re-registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs031180342, Date of registration: March 18, 2019).

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Ochrobactrum anthropi is widely distributed and primarily infects patients with compromised immune functions . Historically, O. anthropi has been considered to possess low toxicity and pathogenicity; however, recent studies suggest that it may in fact cause severe purulent infections. In this case study, we examine a case of O. anthropi infection following corneal transplantation, exploring the occurrence and outcomes of such post-operative infections.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of cases involved examinations, genetic testing for diagnosis, and subsequent treatment. In patients undergoing partial penetrating keratoplasty with a fungal corneal ulcer perforation, anterior chamber exudation and purulence were observed post-surgery. Despite antifungal treatment, genetic testing of the anterior chamber fluid and purulent material confirmed O. anthropi infection. The use of antimicrobial treatment specifically targeting O. anthropi was found to be effective in treating the infection.
CONCLUSIONS: Inflammatory reactions following corneal transplantation should be should be monitored for the presence of other infections. Genetic testing has significant implications for clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Corneal transplantation can be divided into two groups: penetrating and lamellar keratoplasty. Newer minimally invasive procedures have emerged over the years, to improve the visual outcome and reduce complications. This article summarizes the different procedures, their indications and complications, and outlines the pre-, peri- and postoperative management in a clinical setting.Corneal transplantation is the most commonly performed transplantation of donor tissue in modern medicine. In the last years a shift away from penetrating keratoplasty (PK) towards minimally invasive lamellar operative techniques, associated with less complications, can be observed. The Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is used to treat endothelial corneal pathologies and has overtaken the PK to become the most commonly performed form of keratoplasty. Preparation and identification of possible risk-factors are essential preoperative steps to reduce peri- and postoperative complications of keratoplasties. If corneal graft rejection occurs, early and maximum therapy is crucial for graft survival. Laser-assisted techniques offer different advantages in lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty but are not very cost-efficient.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the outcome of corneal grafts, both low risk and high risk, after successfully reversed immunological rejection.
METHODS: Datasets on reversed rejection episodes in penetrating and endothelial keratoplasties between 2014 and 2019 (n=876) were extracted from the Adverse Immune Signatures and their Prevention in Corneal Transplantation database, which contains the prospectively and consecutively collected corneal transplants from five European centres. Stratified by the preoperatively determined risk status for immunological rejection, the outcome parameters analysed included visual acuity, intraocular pressure, endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness before and after reversed rejection episodes.
RESULTS: Fourty-seven (52%) out of a total of 91 identified rejection episodes were successfully reversed and were available for analysis (23 penetrating and 24 endothelial keratoplasties). No statistically significant change was found for any of the parameters studied between the values before and the values 3 months after the rejection episode, irrespective of the preoperative risk status.
CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of corneal grafts that survive immunological rejection may be clinically indistinguishable from the state before immunological rejection, irrespective of graft type and risk status. These findings support clinicians by providing information on prognosis after reversed rejection episodes and by giving patients realistic expectations regarding the outcome.