人工角膜在治疗严重化学烧伤眼中的研究

目的探讨严重化学烧伤性角膜混浊患者行人工角膜植入术的临床效果和并发症等。方法选择2000年10月至2006年3月于解放军总医院眼科就治的28例因严重化学烧伤导致双眼盲目患者的单侧眼,术前视力14只眼为手动,14只眼为光感,并且角膜混浊病变无法采用常规角膜移植手术达到复明目的。其中严重碱烧伤20只眼,严重酸烧伤8只眼。人工角膜植入术分两期：Ⅰ期手术将人工角膜支架植入角膜层间,所选患眼行角膜表面或层间加固性手术。3个月后行Ⅱ期手术,植入带螺纹的人工角膜光学部。常规行晶状体、部分虹膜及前部玻璃体切除术,将外1／3上、下睑缘做永久性缝合。对完全睑球粘连者,用上、下睑皮肤覆盖角膜表面,仅暴露人工角膜光学部。结果Ⅱ期术后观察3—65个月,平均22．6个月,28只眼中有21只眼裸眼视力≥0．05（75％）,其中2只眼裸眼视力≥1．0。经镜片矫正后,11只眼（39％）视力为0．6—1．2;1只眼（4％）0．3～0．5;5只眼（18％）0．05—0．25;3只眼（11％）手动;3只眼（11％）光感;1只眼（4％）无光感。手术并发症包括分离角膜板层时穿人前房,晶状体皮质残留,继发性青光眼,镜柱前表面组织或上皮增生遮盖,镜柱后壁沉着物,角膜溶解,眼内炎,视网膜脱离。结论人工角膜是目前对严重角膜瘢痕、血管化的双眼化学烧伤患者有效的复明手段。该术式结合自体结膜遮盖、自体骨膜移植加固及睑裂部分缝合等,有利于人工角膜的长期存留。术后定期复查、积极预防并发症是保持视力的有效手段。     

人工角膜治疗严重铝水灼伤一例

随着现代化工业的迅速发展,劳动保护不完善,眼外伤的病例不断增长,其中铁水、铝水眼灼伤较为多见。常规角膜移植对于严重灼伤尤其是双眼患者疗效不理想,现将我院应用人工角膜治疗严重铝水灼伤的1例病例分析报告如下。 患者,男,42岁,因“双眼被铝水灼伤13 d”于2007年5月7日至我院就诊。现病史：患者13 d前被铝水灼伤双眼,视物不见、眼痛,在当地医院行药物治疗、双眼羊膜移植,未见明显好转来我院就诊。眼科检查：视力、眼压无法检查,双眼上下眼睑部分缺损,结膜充血,巩膜苍白,羊膜在位,角膜白色混浊,内窥不清。诊断为双眼铝水灼伤。给予重组牛碱性成纤维细胞生长因子眼用凝胶、自体血清、肝素2 500 U,4次/d滴眼;夜间涂左氧氟沙星眼膏,VitC 2.0静脉推注,复方氨基酸250 ml、抗生素静脉滴注。伤后20 d出现双眼角膜自融现象,于2007年6月9日行左眼睑球粘连分离+板层角膜移植术,术后1个月角膜水肿混浊,于9月19日再次行左眼穿透性角膜移植术。2007年7月21日行右眼睑球粘连分离+穹窿成形+板层角膜移植术,术后10 d右眼角膜植片混浊、水肿,出现融解,8月10日再次行右眼穿透性角膜移植术,8月25日右眼角膜植片中央变薄,周边水肿,患者要求放弃右眼治疗。术后1年中,双眼睑球粘连加重,角膜植片反复上皮缺失、水肿、营养不良,行双眼睑裂缝合术,以保存眼球。2008年12月13日闪光视觉诱发电位示双眼P100波振幅下降,以右眼明显。B超示双眼眼球形态可,玻璃体腔内散在点状回声。 2008年12月19日行左眼人工角膜（MICOF）植入术,一期植入人工角膜支架（见图1）。于2009年5月10日行左眼晶状体切除+前部玻璃体切除+人工角膜二期植入术（见图2）,术后12 d,左眼裸眼视力（UCVA）为0.1,最佳矫正视力（BCVA）0.25（-6.00 DS）。因人工角膜突出于结膜约1.5 mm,于2009年7月17日行左耳廓软骨取出+左眼结膜下软骨填充+结膜瓣转移术,术后左眼视力0.1（矫正无助）,2009年9月7日治愈出院,术后半年随访UCVA 0.1。 讨论：眼部铝水灼伤是一种接触性热烧伤,是高温铝液溅入眼内,熔液被包在结膜囊内冷却成固体,释放出热量,导致结膜、角膜、巩膜及眼睑等组织灼伤,发生凝固性坏死。熔化铝温度一般在700 ℃左右,可引起眼部组织不可逆的损害。由于结膜严重缺血、坏死,恶化了角膜周围的环境,使角膜缺氧并导致严重营养障碍,进而使受损的角膜上皮不能再生或反复剥脱,角膜溃疡经久不愈,可出现角膜深层溃疡穿孔或角膜新生血管、无菌性炎症、瘢痕形成及脸球粘连,轻者影响视力,重者造成失明,甚至丧失眼球[1]。 人工角膜（keratoprothesis）是取代病变角膜组织而用异质成形材料制成的一种特殊屈光装置,通过手术植入患眼,以取得一定视力。20世纪60年代开始,随着人们对人工角膜材料不断的探索及人工角膜设计的不断进步,该技术得到了飞速的发展。人工角膜手术适用于双眼化学或热烧伤等引起的严重角结膜瘢痕血管化、完全闭锁性睑球粘连、严重干眼症角膜血管化或角结膜上皮角化、多次角膜移植排斥反应并发大量植片血管化等,并且通过视功能、色觉、视觉电生理及B超等检查显示视网膜的结构和功能尚好者。黄一飞成功应用自体角膜做载体的Boston I型人工角膜植入术治疗复杂性角膜混浊患者10例（10眼）,术后观察1～12个月,平均（5．7±3．8）个月,除1眼视力光感外,其余UCVA为0．1～0．8[2]。黄一飞应用MICOF型人工角膜治疗复杂性角膜混浊患者15例（15眼）,术前视力均为光感 ,角膜混浊病变,无法用常规角膜移植手术达到复明目的,其中严重碱烧伤6眼,严重酸烧伤3眼,铝水烧伤2眼,爆炸伤1眼,严重实质性眼干燥症1眼,多次穿透性角膜移植失败角膜严重血管化2眼,二期术后观察4～26个月,除1眼视力光感外,其余眼UCVA为0.12～1.0[3]。经过多年的临床基础研究,新型一体式人工角膜支架植入,羟基磷灰石表面修饰人工角膜钛支架等的探索,使人工角膜取得了更好的生物组织相容性[4-5]。 本病例多次行羊膜移植、角膜移植、睑裂缝合等手术治疗得以保存眼球,但因严重角膜血管化、睑球粘连而失去了常规角膜移植的机会条件。为复明,医生对其施行了人工角膜植入术。本病例采用俄罗斯费德洛夫眼外科中心制造的MICOF人工角膜,手术分两期进行,一期植入人工角膜支架,5个月后,二期植入人工角膜柱镜,并切除晶状体、前部玻璃体。术后12 d,左眼UCVA为0.1,BCVA 0.25（－6.00 DS）。术后半年视力稳定于0.1。 目前,人工角膜特别适合用于穿透性角膜移植难于成功的角膜盲患者,而且是目前对严重角膜瘢痕血管化、眼睑或泪液功能不良患者有效的复明手段。我国角膜供体严重匮乏,随着技术的发展,人工角膜材料的进步,人工角膜植入术将更具临床意义。     

自体角膜为载体Boston人工角膜治疗复杂性角膜盲

目的评价复杂性角膜混浊患者使用自体角膜做载体的BostonI型人工角膜植入的临床效果。方法回顾性病例研究。10例角膜盲患者（10眼）,术眼病变严重,经至少2名以上国内著名角膜病专家会诊。无法通过角膜移植复明。其中严重碱烧伤7眼,爆炸伤1眼,角膜内皮失代偿多次角膜移植失败1眼．双眼病毒性角膜炎角膜严重血管化1眼。其中9例为双眼盲。术前视力光感或手动。所有病例均一期完成手术,术中使用8．0mm或8．5mm环钻钻取患者角膜,用患者混浊病变的角膜为载体。安装Boston人工角膜。形成患者角膜．人工角膜复合体,复合体作为植片如传统角膜移植实行角膜植床和植片缝合固定,术中常规行晶状体摘除术。结果术后观察1-12个月,平均（5．7±3．8）个月,除1眼视力光感外,其余裸眼视力为0．1～0．8。手术并发症包括角膜植床出血人玻璃体腔2例,继发性青光眼2例,人工角膜后膜4例。所有术眼均无术后漏水并发症发生。结论人工角膜特别适合于穿透性角膜移植难于成功的角膜盲患者,而且是目前对严重角膜瘢痕血管化、眼睑或泪液功能不良患者有效的复明手段。我国角膜供体严重匮乏,用自体角膜为载体可作为部分BostonI型人工角膜植入手术的可行方案。     

保留人工晶状体的穿透性角膜移植术

目的探讨人工晶状体眼行穿透性角膜移植术时,保留人工晶状体的方法。方法人工晶状体术后16例（16只眼）,合并有大泡性角膜病变11只眼,角膜白斑5只眼。采用角膜缘双针固定人工晶状体方法,再常规行穿透性角膜移植术,处理原人工晶状体并发症。结果16例（16只眼）保留人工晶状体,术中人工晶状体固定平稳,2只眼行人工晶状体位置调整,2只眼剪除人工晶状体前膜。术后随访6～18个月,平均（11．2±2．3）个月,矫正视力0．2—0．5者14只眼,占87．5％,角膜保持透明15只眼,占93．7％,所有术眼前房正常。结论人工晶状体眼行穿透性角膜移植时,双针固定人工晶状体,对保留原人工晶状体、处理原人工晶状体并发症、减少植片内皮细胞损失、保持植片透明、恢复视力,是一种简便易行的较好的辅助手术方法。     

穿透性角膜移植治疗人工晶状体植入术后大泡性角膜病变的临床观察

目的 评价穿透性角膜移植术治疗人工晶状体植入术后大泡性角膜病变临床疗效,探讨术中对原人工晶状体的处理。方法 对12例(12只眼)人工晶状体植入术后大泡性角膜病变施行穿透性角膜移植术或穿透性角膜移植术联合手术,观察术后角膜植片及视力变化。结果 随访6～16个月,平均11．2个月,术后临床症状明显缓解或消失,植片保持透明,视力较术前均有提高,其中矫正视力0．02以上11例(0．2以上4例);术后继发性青光眼1例,内皮型排斥反应1例。结论 穿透性角膜移植术是治疗人工晶状体植入术后大泡性角膜病变的一种理想手术方式,不仅能消除刺激症状且能增进视力。术中如何处理人工晶状体应视眼部具体情况。     

穿透性角膜移植与白内障摘出人工晶状体植人联合手术临床探讨

目的对以往放弃治疗的粘连性角膜白斑合并白内障的患者施行穿透性角膜移植、白内障摘出及人工晶状体植入三联手术以挽救视力.方法对11例(11眼)伴有严重粘连性角膜白斑的白内障患者施行三联手术,随访10～36个月,观察视力情况、是否有排斥反应及其发生时间.结果 11眼中有7眼获得有用视力(68%),角膜植片透明7眼(68%),毕透明2眼(16%),混浊2眼(16%).结论该三联手术效果较理想,值得在临床推广,但对植入前房型人工晶状体需谨慎.     

应用临时人工角膜行眼前后节联合手术

目的　评价应用临时人工角膜进行穿透性角膜移植联合眼后节手术的安全性及治疗效果。方法　对复杂性眼球穿通伤所致角膜混浊同时伴有玻璃体视网膜病变 10例患者 11眼 ,施行临时人工角膜下的经睫状体平坦部的闭合式玻璃体切除、球内异物取出、视网膜复位、硅油充填、穿透性角膜移植等联合手术。结果　术后随访 2～ 14月 ,11眼均得到保留 ,9眼角膜植片透明 ,10眼视网膜复位 ,9眼视力较术前提高。其中 3眼矫正视力≥ 0 1,矫正视力在 0 0 5～ 0 1的 4眼 ,1眼术后再次视网膜脱离 ,1眼角膜混浊并萎缩。结论　应用临时人工角膜进行玻璃体手术联合穿透性角膜移植术是治疗严重眼前后节受伤患者的一种有效手术方法     

角膜移植的研究进展

角膜移植是用透明、健康的供体角膜组织替换混浊病变的角膜组织,使患者复明或控制角膜病变,达到增进视力或治疗某些角膜疾病的眼科治疗方法.传统角膜移植分为穿透性角膜移植和板层角膜移植.近10a,深板层角膜移植和内皮细胞移植手术逐渐崛起.而目前,人工角膜移植手术的发展为不适合传统穿透性角膜移植手术的患者提供一种新的选择.本文综述了目前角膜移植领域手术技术的适应证、术后并发症等.     

穿透性角膜移植与白内障摘出及人工晶状体植入联合手术

目的 观察１９８６～１９９８年行穿透性角膜移植与白内障摘出及人工晶状体植入联合手术的疗效。方法 对１３４例患白内障和部分中央性角膜白斑的患者在施行穿透性角膜移植时,从受植孔中摘除白内障,同时植入人工晶状体,结果 对其中１２０例经０．５～１２ａ的随访,术后角膜移植片透明９９例（８２．５％）,混浊２１例（１７．５％）,术后视力提高９２例（７６．７％）,术眼脱盲８９例（７４．２％）。结论 穿透性角膜移植与白内障摘出及人工晶状体植入治疗角膜白斑和白内障疾病具有视力恢复快、术后并发症发生率低等优点。     

真菌性角膜溃疡的手术治疗选择及疗效观察

目的 分析结膜瓣遮盖和部分穿透性角膜移植两种手术方式治疗真菌性角膜溃疡的时机选择和临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析2004年10月至2007年4月收治29例(29只眼)病灶直径≥3mm的真菌性角膜溃疡患者的临床资料,入院时视力从光感～0.2不等,均行角膜刮片送培养及药敏检查,病灶直径≥5mm者行部分穿透性角膜移植者8例(8只眼),病灶直径3～5mm之间或直径≥5mm但无条件行角膜移植手术的共21例(21只眼)行病灶清除联合结膜瓣遮盖,术前术后联合抗真菌药物治疗,随访3～6月,观察角膜及视力情况.结果 行部分穿透性角膜移植术的8例(8只眼)均未出现溃疡复发,仅1例术后1月出现排斥反应,经药物治疗后好转,术后6个月时矫正视力达0.3～0.6;21例(21眼)行病灶清除+结膜瓣遮盖者中,有2例因病情不能控制最终行眼球摘除,余在术后3～6个月时角膜溃疡均治愈,视力从手动～0.5不等.结论 一旦确诊为真菌性角膜溃疡,药物控制不良和(或)病灶较大较深者应尽早考虑手术治疗.若病灶直径≥3mm,应尽早行结膜瓣遮盖,病灶≥5mm累及深层基质者有条件者应立即行部分穿透性角膜移植术,没有材料者应尽早行结膜瓣遮盖,从而控制病情、挽救眼球、争取有用视力.     

Penetrating keratoplasty combined with vitreoretinal surgery for severe ocular injury with blood-stained cornea and no light perception

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of treatment of severe ocular injury with blood-stained cornea and no light perception by combined penetrating keratoplasty and vitreoretinal surgery, and to analyze the relevant factors. METHODS: Records of 7 severely injured eyes of 7 patients with blood-stained cornea and no light perception who underwent penetrating keratoplasty combined with vitrectomy using a temporary keratoprosthesis were evaluated retrospectively. The preoperative visual acuity was no light perception in all injured eyes with a mean intraocular pressure of 3 mm Hg and a range from 2 to 5 mm Hg. The average interval from emergency wound closure to vitrectomy was 18 days with a range from 12 to 21 days. The mean follow-up was 28 months with a range from 26 to 30 months. RESULTS: The postoperative visual acuity was better than light perception in 5 eyes with the best corrected visual acuity from light perception to 0.06. The retina was attached in 5 eyes. The postoperative intraocular pressure ranged from 5 to 15 mm Hg with a mean of 12 mm Hg; it was significantly higher than the preoperative one (p < 0.05). The postoperative complications mainly included temporary intraocular elevation (1 eye), corneal neovascularization (4 eyes), corneal rejection (4 eyes), retinal detachment (2 eyes) and ocular atrophy (2 eyes). CONCLUSION: Penetrating keratoplasty combined with vitrectomy using a temporary keratoprosthesis is a safe and effective method in treating severe ocular injury with blood-stained cornea and no light perception.     

Cornea sparing by endoscopically guided vitreoretinal surgery

PURPOSE: To report a series of eyes with acute severe corneal edema and vitreoretinal complications treated with endoscopic vitreous surgery without a keratoprosthesis to the cornea. DESIGN: Retrospective, small, noncomparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seven patients with unilateral acute severe corneal edema, poor view of the fundus, and vitreoretinal complications were reviewed. Five eyes were postcataract surgery, one eye was postpenetrating intraocular blunt trauma by a ferrous foreign body, and one eye had endophthalmitis. INTERVENTION: Vitreous surgery was performed on each eye under the guidance of endoscopy. Topical steroid treatment was administered to the cornea for several weeks after the vitreoretinal surgery, until the corneal edema had been completely resolved. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: The edematous corneas recovered within an average of 9 weeks (range, 6-13 weeks). The preoperative visual acuity ranged from 6/90 to hand motion at 0.5 m, and the final postoperative visual acuity was 6/30 or better after an average follow-up of 14 months (range, 3-23 months). CONCLUSIONS: (1) Endoscopic surgery for vitreoretinal complications in eyes with acute severe corneal edema can obviate keratoprosthesis and keratoplasty. (2) By minimizing further damage to the corneal endothelium, endoscopic vitreoretinal surgery might benefit corneal recovery.     

Experience with Boston keratoprosthesis type 1 in the developing world

Objective

To report the experience of the Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil, in performing Boston keratoprosthesis type 1 implantation in the developing world.

Methods

We analyzed 30 eyes of 30 patients who underwent Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis surgery between 2008 and 2012 in a prospective interventional study. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative parameters were analyzed, including visual acuity (VA), keratoprosthesis stability, and postoperative complications.

Results

Preoperative diagnoses were failed grafts in 16 eyes (53.33%), chemical injury in 10 eyes (33.33%) and Stevens–Johnson syndrome in 4 eyes (13.33%). Also, 16 eyes (53.33%) had preoperative glaucoma. Preoperative best corrected VA ranged from 20/400 to light perception. With an average follow-up of 32 months (range 1–55 months), postoperative vision improved to >20/200 in 24 eyes (80%). Postoperative VA was statistically improved compared with the preoperative measurement during all postoperative follow-ups (up to 36 months). During the follow-up period (32 months), retention of the initial keratoprosthesis was 93.3%. The incidence of retroprosthetic membrane was 26.66%. Progression of glaucoma occurred in 7 of 16 eyes (43%). Three patients experienced development of glaucoma after keratoprosthesis implantation. One eye experienced development of infectious keratitis, and 2 eyes had retinal detachment.

Conclusions

Performing Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis in a developing country is a viable option after multiple keratoplasty failures and conditions with a poor prognosis for keratoplasty. Our experience appears similar to major reports in the field from investigators in developed countries. Adjustments to postoperative management must be considered according to the particular location.     

眼前后段联合手术治疗复杂性眼病的远期疗效评价

目的 探讨临时人工角膜下行前后段联合手术治疗复杂性眼病的远期疗效。方法1994年6月至2001年6月,107例(107只眼)眼前后段复杂病变的患者于我院在临时人工角膜下行玻璃体视网膜手术,再联合穿透性角膜移植术,术后局部及全身应用糖皮质激素,并随访观察患者视力、眼压、角膜植片及眼底情况。手术治愈标准:(1)植片透明;(2)视网膜复位;(3)眼压正常或经药物控制眼压正常。结果 达到手术治愈标准者78只跟(72.9％),手术后眼球保存者92,只眼(86.0％),术后发生植片免疫排斥者34只眼(31.8％),眼球萎缩13只眼(12.2％),继发性青光眼15只眼(14.0％)。术前存在增生性玻璃体视网膜病变(PVR)患眼的视网膜手术治愈率与无PVR者比较,差异有显著意义(x2=3.90,P<0.05)。结论 临时人工角膜下眼球前后段联合手术是治疗角膜明显混浊合并玻璃体视网膜病变的有效方法。远期失败的主要原因是角膜植片内皮功能失代偿和增生性玻璃体视网膜病变。(中华眼科杂志,2004,40:514-516)     

玻璃体切割术治疗眼内炎的临床分析

目的 探讨眼内炎的病因构成及玻璃体切割术治疗眼内炎的临床效果。 方法 对我院1999年1月～2001年12月收治的眼内炎患者53例54只眼进行回顾性分析，男38例，女15例，年龄1～74岁，平均年龄32岁。对2例（2只眼）炎症较轻的患者仅采用药物治疗，5例（5只眼）视力无光感，炎症反应重的患者行眼球内容物剜除术，其余46例（47只眼）均采用常规三通道玻璃体切割术。随访2～32个月,平均10.5个月。 结果 眼球穿通伤导致的眼内炎共32只眼，占59.26%。内源性眼内炎8只眼，占14.81%。与白内障手术相关的眼内炎共7 只眼，占12.96%，青光眼手术晚期滤泡感染2只眼，占3.70%。玻璃体切割术后3只眼，占5 .56%。放射状角膜切开术（radial keratotomy,RK）后1只眼，占1.85%。原因不明1只眼，占1.85%。经治疗后患者视力明显提高（P=0.003）。3 d内行玻璃体切割术患者的视力恢复明显高于3 d后的患者（P=0.014），7 d内行玻璃体切割术患者的视力恢复明显优于7 d后的患者（P=0.021）。功能成功（视力≥0.02）37只眼,占68.52%；解剖成功（视力＜0.02，眼球结构完整）47只眼,占87.04%，脱盲（视力≥0.05）27只眼, 占50.00%。 结论 眼球穿通伤，尤其是伴有眼内异物存留者是导致眼内炎的最主要原因，尽早行玻璃体切割术是治疗眼内炎的理想方法。 （中华眼底病杂志，2003，19：93-95）     

Five year follow up of biocolonisable microporous fluorocarbon haptic (BIOKOP) keratoprosthesis implantation in patients with high risk of corneal graft failure

AIM: To study the anatomical and visual performance following implantation of a model of artificial cornea and to evaluate the postoperative long term complications. METHODS: 11 eyes of 11 patients with bilateral corneal blindness considered as potentially having high risk of failure of penetrating corneal keratoplasty were implanted with biocolonisable Kpro keratoprosthesis (BIOKOP I, FCI, Rantigny, France) in the period between January 1996 and May 1998. Only one eye was implanted in all patients and followed up for a period of 60 months. The visual outcome, anatomical and functional stability, complications, and the general performance of the keratoprosthesis were evaluated. RESULTS: The keratoprosthesis (BIOKOP I) only 36.3% remained in position to date. In the patients' last visit five eyes (45.4%) were blind and one (9.0%) showed a slight improvement in the best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in comparison to preoperative tests. Six eyes (54.5%) showed improved BCVA before having postoperative complications. Four eyes underwent replacement of a BIOKOP I Kpro with a BIOKOP II as a result of extrusion. The keratoprostheses remained anatomically in situ for a mean of 25.5 months and their functional performance period was limited to a mean of 22 months. CONCLUSION: Corneal keratoprosthesis (BIOKOP I, II) does not provide a stable anatomical relation with the surrounding ocular structures. Its ability to restore vision is limited to a short postoperative period in eyes implanted with severe ocular surface disease.     

应用临时人工角膜行前后节联合手术治疗严重眼外伤

目的 比较应用临时人工角膜行玻璃体切割联合穿透性角膜移植术治疗不同类型严重眼外伤的临床效果.方法 对伴有严重角膜混浊的眼外伤患者20例(21只眼),包括爆炸伤11例(12只眼)、眼球穿通伤9例(9只眼).术前视力为光感～眼前手动,采用临时人工角膜代替病变角膜完成闭合式玻璃体切割、白内障切除、球内异物取出、视网膜复位等眼内操作后,再用新鲜供体角膜置换人工角膜.术后随访3～36个月,平均17月,随访视力、眼压、眼球解剖完整性及并发症.结果 全部眼爆炸伤和78%的眼球穿通伤,共19只眼(90%)保存眼球解剖结构完整性.11只眼(52%)保持最佳矫正视力≥0.05,其中眼爆炸伤9只眼(9/12),穿通伤2只眼(2/9).严重影响预后的并发症有持续性低眼压、复发性视网膜脱离,均发生在眼穿通伤.结论 临时人工角膜下行前后节联合手术是治疗伴有严重角膜混浊的外伤眼的惟一有效的方法,眼爆炸伤预后好于眼球穿通伤.     

Implantation of Iakymenko keratoprosthesis in patients with severe ocular injury

AIM: To present the results of implantation of Iakymenko keratoprosthesis in five patients with vascularized corneal leukoma caused by severe ocular injury. METHODS: Iakymenko keratoprosthesis was implanted into 5 eyes of 5 patients: 4 patients were suffered from chemical burns and 1 patient from explosive injury. The preoperative visual acuity ranged from light perception to hand motion. The implantation surgery was composed of two-stage procedures. The follow-up period was from 9 months to 11 years. The outcome measures were visual acuity, retention, and complications of the keratoprosthesis. RESULTS: Vision improvements were achieved in most patients. All keratoprosthesis were retained within the follow-up period. Corneal melting occurred in one patient and fibrous closure in another patient, both of which were successfully treated. Retinal detachment occurred in one patient after surgery. CONCLUSION: Iakymenko keratoprosthesis seems to be a promising alternative for the patients with severe corneal injury, but further investigation is needed to evaluate the role of Iakymenko keratoprosthesis.     

Combined pars-plana-vitrectomy and tectonic keratoplasty; indications for and results from 15 patients

BACKGROUND: Acute endophthalmitis requires a vitrectomy. Vitrectomy and autokeratoplasty has been reported, if the infection originates from a stromal keratitis in an aphakic eye. This retrospective non-randomized cohort study points out the requirements, indications and results of combined keratoplasty and vitrectomy in keratitis and endophthalmitis compared with noninfectious corneal and vitreoretinal problems. PATIENTS AND SURGERY: In 1995-1999, a vitrectomy and keratoplasty was performed on 15 patients (16 eyes), 10 of these with an endophthalmitis (median 71 years) and a follow-up of 2-60 months (median 19.3 months). 14 of 15 patients had had multiple prior surgery. Stromal keratitis as a sequela of keratoplasty was seen in 5 eyes (3x ruptured suture), 5x diffuse infiltration in compromised corneas (1x with a perforation, 2x with Fuchs' corneal dystrophy, 3x postoperative). In the patients without endophthalmitis 6 eyes were aphakic with corneal scars and no fundus visualization. Five eyes had a retinal detachment, one had an intraocular foreign body. An allogeneic keratoplasty was done in 14, and an allogeneic sclerokeratoplasty and an autologous sclerokeratoplasty in one eye each. RESULTS: Keratoplasty without keratoprosthesis allowed for fundus visualization, and a pars plana vitrectomy was done with a wide angle contact lens, 8x with C2F6-, 1x with silicone oil 5000 cs instillation, and gentamicin and 15 micrograms r-tPA added. In 5 vitrectomy specimens (50%) pathogenic bacteria were found. No recurrences of infection were seen. Conservation of the eyes and postoperative fundus visualization was possible in each case. The postoperative increase in visual acuity of 0.1 or better was significant in both patient groups. 2 eyes remained at preoperative levels, 14 ameliorated by > 1 lines. Complications were 1x directly postoperative graft decompensation, 1x rejection after 40 months, 6x persisting secondary glaucomas, 2x hypotony syndromes, 1x with phthisis and enucleation, 1x epiretinal gliosis. CONCLUSIONS: Curative surgery of acute keratitis and endophthalmitis by vitrectomy and keratoplasty may result in similarly successful outcomes as in noninfectious corneal scars and vitreoretinal pathology, if some requirements (e.g. adequate antibiotic treatment, graft material, skilled anterior and posterior segment surgeon) are fulfilled.