Impact of Clinical Factors on the Long-Term Functional and Anatomic Outcomes of Osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis and Tibial Bone Keratoprosthesis

Paz, María Fidéliz de la; Toledo, Juan Álvarez de; Charoenrook, Víctor; Sel, Saadettin; Temprano, José; Barraquer, Rafael I.; Michael, Ralph

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2010.11.011

Cited by 56 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most prominent among these is the modified osteoodontokeratoprosthesis (MOOKP). [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Direct comparisons of the Boston keratoprosthesis implantation (type I or II) with MOOKP implantation in eyes with MMP are limited by the small number (,5) of MMP eyes included in most reports, 22,23,25,26 and in some cases, comparisons are limited by the lack of classification of outcomes by preoperative diagnosis. 21,24 Only 2 studies report the best-corrected visual acuity and anatomic retention of the MOOKP device over the long term.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…21,24 Only 2 studies report the best-corrected visual acuity and anatomic retention of the MOOKP device over the long term. 20,27 By Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, De La Paz et al 27 reported retention of visual acuity of 20/400 or better 2 years after MOOKP implantation at approximately 40% for 8 eyes with MMP. Their results are roughly similar to those in MMP eyes that were treated with Boston keratoprosthesis type II, with a Kaplan-Meier rate of 50% retention of visual acuity of 20/200 or better at 2 years postoperatively, and considerably better than the results in MMP eyes treated with the Boston keratoprosthesis type I (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Boston Keratoprosthesis Type I in Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Palioura

Kim

Dohlman

et al. 2013

Cornea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Boston Keratoprosthesis Type I in Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Palioura

Kim

Dohlman

et al. 2013

Cornea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cortical bone grafts have by themselves been harvested and used as a carrier for the optical cylinder, though the resorption rates have been noted to be shorter in comparison to the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone augmentation of the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina in MOOKP—will it delay laminar resorption?

Iyer

Srinivasan

Agarwal

et al. 2015

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A specific problem of the OOKP surgery is laminar resorption, dissolution of the lamina, which has an incidence of 19%–43% 33 37. Laminar resorption is accelerated in children and the young, and with tibial and allograft laminae.…”

Section: Keratoprostheses: Current Challenges and Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

A brief review of Boston type-1 and osteo-odonto keratoprostheses

Avadhanam

Liu

2014

Br J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally there are ≈4.9 million bilaterally corneal blind and 23 million unilaterally corneal blind. Majority of this blindness exists in the developing countries, where resources for corneal banking and transplant surgery are less than adequate. Survival of corneal grafts gradually declines over the long term. Corneal transplantation has poor prognosis in vascularised corneal beds, ocular surface disease and viral keratitis. Keratoprosthesis (KPro) remains as a final option for end-stage ocular surface disease, multiple corneal transplant failures and high-risk corneal grafts. Boston type-1 KPro and osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis are the two devices proven useful in recent years. Choice of a keratoprosthetic device is patient specific based on the underlying diagnosis, ocular morbidity and patient suitability. KPro surgery demands a high level of clinical and surgical expertise, lifelong commitment and extensive resources. Improvements in techniques and biomaterials may in the future provide retainable KPros that do not need regular follow-up of patients, have low complications but high retention rates and may be produced at a low cost on a mass scale to be available as 'off the shelf' devices. Because KPros have the potential to effectively address the burden of surgically treatable corneal blindness and may also eliminate the problems of corneal transplantation, more research is required to develop KPros as substitutes for corneal transplantation even in low-risk cases. In those countries where corneal blindness is a major liability, we need a two pronged approach: one to develop eye donation, eye banking and corneal transplantation and the second to establish centres for keratoprostheses, which are affordable and technically not challenging, in a population where default on follow-up visits are high. Until the latter is achieved, KPros should be viewed as a temporary means for visual restoration and be offered in national and supraregional specialised centres only.

show abstract

Impact of Clinical Factors on the Long-Term Functional and Anatomic Outcomes of Osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis and Tibial Bone Keratoprosthesis

Cited by 56 publications

References 18 publications

The Boston Keratoprosthesis Type I in Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

The Boston Keratoprosthesis Type I in Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid

Bone augmentation of the osteo-odonto alveolar lamina in MOOKP—will it delay laminar resorption?

A brief review of Boston type-1 and osteo-odonto keratoprostheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About