18.01.2015 Views

1st EuCornea Congress

1st EuCornea Congress

1st EuCornea Congress

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>1st</strong> <strong>EuCornea</strong> <strong>Congress</strong> venice, 17-19 june 2010<br />

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS<br />

26<br />

Dua, Harminder Singh<br />

Management of Ocular surface chemical burns<br />

H.S. Dua, D. Said<br />

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK<br />

Chemical burns of the ocular surface (OS) usually follow domestic or<br />

workplace accidents and can have devastating consequences. Fortunately<br />

the majority are mild. Acute stage management is of paramount importance<br />

to encourage a favourable prognosis. Besides the eyes, initial examination<br />

should include the surrounding facial skin, oropharynx, respiratory passages<br />

and the upper gastrointestinal tract for damage due to inhalation or ingestion<br />

of the chemical. Three stages of OS burns are recognised: Immediate: Direct<br />

result of the injury and extending up to one week. Intermediate: After the<br />

first week when the host healing response has set in, and extending up to<br />

three weeks and Late: After the first three weeks and extending to several<br />

months. The signs are associated with repair and regeneration or lack<br />

thereof. Treatment consists of copious irrigation and removal, surgically if<br />

necessary, of any retained chemical. Medical treatment is directed towards<br />

promoting epithelisation and wound healing (ascorbate, autologous serum,<br />

possibly steroids); neutralising proteases and enzymes (sodium citrate,<br />

acetylcystiene, doxycycline); preventing or treating infection (antibiotics);<br />

controlling intraocular pressure (acetazolamide); cycloplegics and others.<br />

Surgical procedures such as excision of necrotic material, amniotic<br />

membrane transplant, conjunctival patch grafting from the other uninvolved<br />

eye, tenoplasty, gluing and lid procedures to ensure eye cover and sequential<br />

sector conjunctival epitheliectomy may also be required in the immediate and<br />

intermediate stages. Late stage ocular surface reconstruction is achieved by<br />

auto or allo limbal transplants or of ex-vivo expanded sheets.<br />

Grabner, Günther<br />

Keratoprosthesis<br />

G. Grabner<br />

University Eye Clinic,Paracelsus Medizinische Privat-Universität Salzburg Austria<br />

This review lecture will analyse the keratoprosthesis (Kpro´s) currently<br />

available as valid methods for treating very severe anterior segment disease,<br />

in regard to the initial clinical findings, the potential complications encountered<br />

and the surgical requirements needed for the different techniques. Factors<br />

considered are: involvement of one eye only or both eyes, limbal stem<br />

cell availability and ‘dry eye’ status, availability of healthy teeth, as well as<br />

surgical requirements and those needed for follow-up. A systematic approach<br />

to the surgical options available for different stages of a variety of anterior<br />

segment diseases and currently published results of VA and complications<br />

and information about a new, freely available database will be given. With<br />

this method it will become clear that some popular reconstructive surgical<br />

techniques should be avoided in cases where a very low chance of success<br />

is to be expected (e.g. amniotic membrane and stem cell transplantation and<br />

/or PKP in very dry eyes -> these would have to be treated e.g. with OOKP).<br />

Following a simple clinical decision path the anterior segment surgeon will<br />

be presented with standardized guidelines for treating those patients where<br />

conventional surgical procedures have to be avoided and replaced by the<br />

rather infrequently performed keratoprosthesis techniques.<br />

Güell, José Luis<br />

PK: Gold Standard in PK, indications and future trends<br />

J. Güell<br />

Barcelona Spain<br />

The rationale of lamellar keratoplasty has always been to substitute<br />

only those corneal layers with irreversible alterations. Both, anterior and<br />

posterior lamellar techniques, have obvious theoretical advantages in front<br />

of penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) and, especially during these last few<br />

years, improvements in the surgical techniques and the mastering in the<br />

use of microkeratomes have completely change the standart for the corneal<br />

surgeon. Two very robust lamellar techniques are becoming the regular<br />

approach worldwide for a number of corneal problems: DALKP (Deep<br />

anterior lamellar keratoplasty ) using the ‘big-bubble’ approach (either with<br />

air or viscoelastic) and DSEK (Descemet Stripping Endothelial keratoplasty).<br />

Despite their widespread use, it must be recognized that we do not yet have<br />

enough long-term data ( for example percentage of 20/40 and 20/20 at 5<br />

years, incidence of re-transplantation in relation with the original disease, etc)<br />

to fully and properly compare with penetrating keratoplasty, technique that<br />

have been the standard approach for corneal transplantation for more than a<br />

century. What we know today are general preliminary data such as in DSEK:<br />

final visual results are slightly worse than after PKP for some investigators<br />

(probably this will improve once Descemet alone -DMEK- might be<br />

transplanted on a regular basis), visual rehabilitation time are comparable or<br />

slightly better for DSEK, final refraction is clearly superior for DSEK, chronic<br />

endothelial loss seems superior for DSEK, endothelial rejection episodes<br />

must be quite similar and the strength of the wound is also obviously superior<br />

for DSEK. Its main limitations are a strongly affected anterior stroma and/<br />

or the need of precise surgical manouvres in the anterior chamber. In these<br />

latter situations, PKP is clearly advantageous, also for those surgeons<br />

defending the lamellar approach In DALKP, also final visual results are slightly<br />

worse that after PKP with a similar visual rehabilitation time, final refraction is<br />

also similar to PKP, being the main advantage the lower chronic endothelial<br />

cell loss (surgical trauma, preserved endothelium and rejection episodes<br />

are the three mainstones). Regarding the strength of the wound, there are<br />

different opinions, and only long-term studies will clarify its incidence and<br />

severity, as we all know about PKP. Its main limitation appears in those cases<br />

where we are unable to evaluate or have doubts about the status of the<br />

endothelium (infectious keratitis with important intraocular involment, herpetic<br />

diseasse with a dense posterior stromal scar, keratoconic, hydrops, etc).<br />

Again, in these situations PKP is a better approach, also for those surgeons<br />

defending lamellar surgery. On the other hand and as it has become quite<br />

common during the last 20 years, new refractive surgery technology is being<br />

applied by corneal surgeons (topographers, intracorneal ring segments,<br />

femtosecond lasers, etc). The femtosecond laser has improved precision,<br />

quality and repetibility of the lamellar cut (becoming perhaps the ‘standard’<br />

knive for the lamellar surgeon in the near future) but also allows the creation<br />

of new wound designs for PKP. We, as some others groups worldwide, have<br />

been exploring different techniques, such as the so called ‘top.hat’ for PKP.<br />

Again, preliminary data seems to demonstrate a higher resistance of the<br />

penetrating wound, compared with standard PKP, a quicker and better visual<br />

and refractive rehabilitation (perhaps able to compete with DSEK), some<br />

immunological advantages (reduction of the anterior wound diameter) all<br />

together with the classical advantages of penetrating surgery (visual acuity<br />

and quality and intraocular manouvres at the time of the surgery) As most<br />

of us will agree, only prospective properly designed comparative long-term<br />

studies will demonstrate the superiority of one technique over the others for a<br />

particular indication but, in any case, penetrating keratoplasty will remain the<br />

standard for a long time and worldwide for a variety of clinical situations<br />

Hannush, Sadeer B.<br />

Amniotic membrane transplantation and fibrin sealant: A<br />

true advance in ocular surface reconstruction<br />

S. Hannush, Pennsylvania, USA<br />

The lecture will emphasize the advantages and limitations of amniotic<br />

membrane transplantation in ocular surface reconstruction. The potential<br />

advantages of fibrin sealant over suture fixation will be discussed.<br />

Malecaze, Francois<br />

Revision on corneal wound healing<br />

F. Malecaze<br />

Toulouse, France<br />

Revision on corneal wound healing F Malecaze Corneal transparency<br />

depends on the scarring quality after a traumatic wound of the cornea, but<br />

also after refractive corneal surgery which goal is to optically correct refractive<br />

abnormalities, such as myopia. The wound healing secondary to traumatic<br />

lesions (chemical, immunological, infectious…) or after refractive surgery,<br />

involves epithelial/fibroblast interactions, molecules of the extracellular<br />

matrix, and soluble mediators such as growth factors, which can lead to the<br />

formation of corneal tissue scarring impairing its transparency. On injury,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!