Blood-Aqueous Barrier Disruption in Penetrating and Posterior Lamellar Keratoplasty: Implications for Clinical Outcome

Abstract

Background The blood-aqueous barrier (BAB) separates immunoprivileged tissue of the eye from the blood circulation. Disruption of the BAB is therefore a risk factor for rejection after keratoplasty.

Purpose The present work provides a review of the work of our group and others on BAB disruption in penetrating and posterior lamellar keratoplasty and its implications for clinical outcome.

Methods A PubMed literature search was performed to generate a review paper.

Results Laser flare photometry provides an objective and reproducible method to assess the integrity of the BAB. Studies of the flare after penetrating and posterior lamellar keratoplasty demonstrate a mostly regressive disruption of the BAB in the postoperative course, which is influenced in extent and duration by multiple factors. Persistently elevated flare values or an increase in flare after initial postoperative regeneration may indicate an increased risk of rejection.

Discussion In case of persistent or recurrent elevated flare values after keratoplasty, intensified (local) immunosuppression may potentially be useful. This could become important in the future, especially for the monitoring of patients after high-risk keratoplasty. Whether an increase of the laser flare is a reliable early indicator of an impending immune reaction after penetrating or posterior lamellar keratoplasty has to be shown in prospective studies.

Key words

keratoplasty - DMEK - tyndallometry - tyndall - flare - blood-aqueous barrier

Publication History

Received: 13 January 2023

Accepted: 17 April 2023

Article published online:
19 May 2023

• Literatur

• 1 Coca-Prados M. The blood-aqueous barrier in health and disease. J Glaucoma 2014; 23: S36-38 DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000107.
• 2 Ladas JG, Wheeler NC, Morhun PJ. et al. Laser flare-cell photometry: methodology and clinical applications. Surv Ophthalmol 2005; 50: 27-47 DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2004.10.004.
• 3 Jabs DA, Nussenblatt RB, Rosenbaum JT. et al. Standardization of uveitis nomenclature for reporting clinical data. Results of the First International Workshop. Am J Ophthalmol 2005; 140: 509-516 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.03.057.
• 4 Hogan MJ, Kimura SJ, Thygeson P. Signs and symptoms of uveitis. I. Anterior uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 1959; 47: 155-170 DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)78239-x.
• 5 Küchle M. Laser tyndallometry in anterior segment diseases. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1994; 5: 110-116
• 6 De Maria M, Iannetta D, Cimino L. et al. Measuring Anterior Chamber Inflammation After Cataract Surgery: A Review of the Literature Focusing on the Correlation with Cystoid Macular Edema. Clin Ophthalmol 2020; 14: 41-52 DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S237405.
• 7 Schaub F, Fauser S, Kirchhof B. et al. [Laser flare photometry for identification of high-risk patients for proliferative vitreoretinopathy]. Ophthalmologe 2018; 115: 1079-1083 DOI: 10.1007/s00347-018-0777-y.
• 8 Mori M, Araie M, Sakurai M. et al. Effects of pilocarpine and tropicamide on blood-aqueous barrier permeability in man. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992; 33: 416-423
• 9 Schumacher S, Nguyen NX, Küchle M. et al. Quantification of aqueous flare after phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117: 733-735 DOI: 10.1001/archopht.117.6.733.
• 10 Hoerster R, Hermann MM, Rosentreter A. et al. Profibrotic cytokines in aqueous humour correlate with aqueous flare in patients with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Br J Ophthalmol 2013; 97: 450-453 DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302636.
• 11 Schoeneberger V, Eberhardt S, Menghesha L. et al. Association between blood-aqueous barrier disruption and extent of retinal detachment. Eur J Ophthalmol 2023; 33: 421-427 DOI: 10.1177/11206721221099251.
• 12 Küchle M, Nguyen NX, Naumann GO. Quantitative assessment of the blood-aqueous barrier in human eyes with malignant or benign uveal tumors. Am J Ophthalmol 1994; 117: 521-528 DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)70015-7.
• 13 Ma DH, See LC, Chen JJ. Long-term observation of aqueous flare following penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea 2003; 22: 413-419 DOI: 10.1097/00003226-200307000-00005.
• 14 Baydoun L, Chang Lam F, Schaal S. et al. Quantitative Assessment of Aqueous Flare After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty for Fuchs Endothelial Dystrophy. Cornea 2018; 37: 848-853 DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001576.
• 15 Kruger A, Schauersberger J, Findl O. et al. Postoperative inflammation after clear corneal and sclerocorneal incisions. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998; 24: 524-528 DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(98)80296-4.
• 16 Oshika T, Yoshimura K, Miyata N. Postsurgical inflammation after phacoemulsification and extracapsular extraction with soft or conventional intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992; 18: 356-361 DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80071-5.
• 17 Shah SM, Spalton DJ. Changes in anterior chamber flare and cells following cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 1994; 78: 91-94 DOI: 10.1136/bjo.78.2.91.
• 18 Nguyen NX, Langenbucher A, Seitz B. et al. Blood-aqueous barrier breakdown after penetrating keratoplasty with simultaneous extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber lens implantation. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2001; 239: 114-117 DOI: 10.1007/s004170000244.
• 19 Sen HN, Uusitalo R, Laatikainen L. Subclinical inflammation after laser in situ keratomileusis in corneal grafts. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 782-787 DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01239-7.
• 20 Okumura N, Velumani T, Hadiya F. et al. Analysis of Immune Cells on Donor Corneal Endothelium After Corneal Transplantation Using the HRT-Rostock Cornea Module. Cornea 2021; 40: 1445-1452 DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000002706.
• 21 Hoffmann F, Pahlitzsch T. Predisposing factors in corneal graft rejection. Cornea 1989; 8: 215-219
• 22 Trinh L, Bouheraoua N, Muraine M. et al. Anterior chamber fibrin reaction during Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2022; 25: 101323 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajoc.2022.101323.
• 23 Küchle M, Nguyen NX, Naumann GO. Aqueous flare following penetrating keratoplasty and in corneal graft rejection. Arch Ophthalmol 1994; 112: 354-358 DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1994.01090150084028.
• 24 Lopatin DE, Van Poperin N, MacCallum DK. et al. Changes in aqueous immunoglobulin and albumin levels following penetrating keratoplasty. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1989; 30: 122-131
• 25 Küchle M, Nguyen NX, Seitz B. et al. Blood-aqueous barrier after mechanical or nonmechanical excimer laser trephination in penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 1998; 125: 177-181 DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(99)80088-9.
• 26 Cursiefen C, Martus P, Nguyen NX. et al. Corneal neovascularization after nonmechanical versus mechanical corneal trephination for non-high-risk keratoplasty. Cornea 2002; 21: 648-652 DOI: 10.1097/00003226-200210000-00003.
• 27 Funding M, Vorum H, Honore B. et al. Proteomic analysis of aqueous humour from patients with acute corneal rejection. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2005; 83: 31-39 DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00381.x.
• 28 Cursiefen C, Wenkel H, Martus P. et al. Impact of short-term versus long-term topical steroids on corneal neovascularization after non-high-risk keratoplasty. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2001; 239: 514-521 DOI: 10.1007/s004170100313.
• 29 Flockerzi E, Maier P, Böhringer D. et al. Trends in Corneal Transplantation from 2001 to 2016 in Germany: A Report of the DOG-Section Cornea and its Keratoplasty Registry. Am J Ophthalmol 2018; 188: 91-98 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2018.01.018.
• 30 Hos D, Tuac O, Schaub F. et al. Incidence and Clinical Course of Immune Reactions after Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty: Retrospective Analysis of 1000 Consecutive Eyes. Ophthalmology 2017; 124: 512-518 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.12.017.
• 31 Hoerster R, Stanzel TP, Bachmann BO. et al. Intensified Early Postoperative Topical Steroids Do Not Influence Endothelial Cell Density After Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Combined With Cataract Surgery (Triple-DMEK). Cornea 2016; 35: 1396-1400 DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000981.
• 32 Schaub F, Mestanoglu M, Cursiefen C. et al. Impact of early intensified postoperative corticosteroids on immune reaction rates after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2022; 260: 693-695 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021-05393-9.
• 33 Schrittenlocher S, Grass C, Dietlein T. et al. Graft survival of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in corneal endothelial decompensation after glaucoma surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2022; 260: 1573-1582 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021-05506-4.
• 34 Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW. Descemetʼs stripping endothelial keratoplasty: long-term graft survival and risk factors for failure in eyes with preexisting glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2012; 119: 1982-1987 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.04.031.
• 35 Aravena C, Yu F, Deng SX. Outcomes of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty in Patients With Previous Glaucoma Surgery. Cornea 2017; 36: 284-289 DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001095.