Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Pre-Punch Grafts in Corneal Transplantation in Patients with Keratoconus
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate and compare the clinical and functional outcomes of traditional penetrating keratoplasty (PK) and PK using pre-punched (Pre-Punch) donor cornea in patients with stage III-IV keratoconus.
Material and Methods. The study included 43 patients (43 eyes) diagnosed with stage III–IV keratoconus. The main group consisted of 21 patients (21 eyes) after PK with Pre-Punch grafts. The control group included 22 patients (22 eyes) who underwent traditional PK. The evaluation included visual acuity, keratotopography, endothelial cell density, and postoperative complications at 6 and 12 months.
Results. At 12 months, the main group showed higher uncorrected (0,42±0,09) and best-corrected visual acuity (0,64±0,12) compared to the control group (p<0.05). The mean Kmax was 45,7±2,1 D in the main group versus 46,9±2,4 D (p<0.05) in control group. Endothelial cell density was higher in the Pre-Punch group (2300±120 cells/mm2 vs. 2150±130 cells/mm2, p<0.05). The incidence of immune rejection was lower in the main group (9,5% and 22,7%, p<0.05).
Conclusion. The use of Pre-Punch grafts in PK provides better functional outcomes, greater biomechanical stability, and a lower risk of complications compared to the traditional technique.
About the Authors
A. F. Yusupov
Республиканский специализированный научно-практический медицинский центр микрохирургии глаза
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
S. S. Saidjonov
Республиканский специализированный научно-практический медицинский центр микрохирургии глаза
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
V. U. Rozukulov
Республиканский специализированный научно-практический медицинский центр микрохирургии глаза
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
T. N. Savranova
Республиканский специализированный научно-практический медицинский центр микрохирургии глаза
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Gerasimov A. A., Kovalenko P. N. Keratoplasty for keratoconus: problems and prospects. Russian Ophthalmological Journal. 2018; 21(5):45-52. (in Russ)
2. Dmitriev I. V., Frolova L. P. Evaluation of endothelial cell density after various graft preparation methods. Vestnik Oftalmologii. 2021;138(6):60-67.(in Russ)
3. Anwar M. R., Rakhimov T., Kamilov A. D. Immunological aspects of keratoplasty: modern approaches to reducing the risk of graft rejection. Ophthalmology. 2020;17(3):112-118. (in Russ)
4. Armitage V., Harper J., Phillips A. Comparative analysis of traditional and laser-assisted donor cornea preparation for transplantation. Journal of Corneal Transplantation. 2017;12(2):75-82. (in Engl)
5. Busin M., Loris G., Sanchez F. Pre-Punch grafts in corneal surgery: impact on clinical outcomes. Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers & Imaging Retina. 2019;24(1):33-41. (in Engl)
6. Hjortdal J., Larsen T., Olsen M. Influence of graft preparation technique on refractive and biomechanical properties of the cornea. Acta Ophthalmologica. 2020;98(4):87-95. (in Engl)
7. Melles G., van Rijmsdijk A., Lambrechts D. Modern approaches to standardized donor cornea preparation. Ophthalmology Journal. 2016;123(2):205-213. (in Engl)
8. Price F., Greve T., Schroeder B. Femtosecond laser keratoplasty: advantages over traditional methods. Cornea Surgery. 2018;17(6):119–126. (in Engl)
9. Reinhart T., Müller K., Dorner H. Long-term outcomes of Pre-Punch grafts in corneal transplantation. Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology. 2021; 29(5):310-319.
10. Tan S., Wong Y., Chan H. Influence of graft preparation technique on postoperative complications in penetrating keratoplasty. British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2019;103(7):812-819. (in Engl)
11. Tao A., Lin J., Tsen H. Laser-prepared grafts in keratoplasty: comparative analysis with mechanical trephination. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2021;145(3):140-148. (in Engl)
Review
For citations:
Yusupov A.F., Saidjonov S.S., Rozukulov V.U., Savranova T.N. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Pre-Punch Grafts in Corneal Transplantation in Patients with Keratoconus. Bashkortostan Medical Journal. 2025;20(2):8-12. (In Russ.)
Views:
2
Email this article 
