PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2026Acta Ophthalmologica0 citationsOpen Access

Astigmatic changes after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty ( DMEK ) in decompensated penetrating keratoplasty grafts

View Full Paper
FSFlorian Thomas SteinbergJWJithmi WeliwitageMBMarie von Berg

Key Points

  • To assess astigmatism changes after DMEK in eyes with prior penetrating keratoplasty failure.
  • Retrospective analysis of 15 eyes post-DMEK for endothelial decompensation after PK.
  • Measured astigmatism changes using anterior and posterior keratometry and True Net Power (TNP).
  • Compared astigmatism changes pre- and post-DMEK using algebraic and vectorial methods.
  • Utilized the Wilcoxon rank test for statistical significance.
  • SIC in astigmatism magnitude was observed: anterior surface -1.4dpt, posterior surface -0.2dpt, TNP -1.3dpt.
  • Algebraic method showed no significant changes compared to a hypothetical median of 0dpt and 10°.
  • Vectorial method revealed significant changes: anterior surface median 4.4dpt (p < 0.001), posterior surface median 1.0dpt (p = 0.012), TNP median 3.6dpt (p < 0.001).

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the surgery‐induced changes of astigmatism after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) in eyes with failed previous penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Design Retrospective, interventional cohort study based on prospective DMEK database. Methods Evaluation of 15 eyes after DMEK surgery for endothelial decompensation after PK. Astigmatic changes before decompensation and after DMEK surgery were compared using anterior and posterior keratometry and True Net Power (TNP) in corneal tomography (Pentacam, Oculus). The differences in magnitude of astigmatism and axis of steep meridian were calculated by algebraic and vectorial methods, and significant differences to specified thresholds were determined by the non‐parametric Wilcoxon rank test. Results Surgically induced changes (SIC) in magnitude of astigmatism at anterior surface, posterior surface and TNP were −1.4dpt ± 3.7, −0.2dpt ± 0.8 and −1.3dpt ± 3.9, respectively. No significant changes in astigmatism and axis difference by algebraic method in comparison with a hypothetical median of 0dpt and 10° were observed. Calculation of astigmatism difference by vectorial method showed a significant deviation in anterior surface (observed median = 4.4dpt, p < 0.001), posterior surface (observed median 1.0dpt, p = 0.012) and TNP (observed median = 3.6dpt, p < 0.001). Conclusion Even if no significant change in magnitude and axis of astigmatism to acceptable thresholds could be shown after DMEK in failed PK using the algebraic method, there is a significant and relevant change in magnitude of astigmatism using the vectorial calculation. Based on these results, caution is advised when using toric intraocular lenses in PK eyes, as astigmatic change is expected when performing DMEK on eyes with failed PK.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Steinberg et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698d6eeb5be6419ac0d54e3ahttps://doi.org/10.1111/aos.70081
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper