Global cell-by-cell evaluation of endothelial viability after two methods of graft preparation in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty
Maninder Bhogal, Maria S Balda, Karl Matter, Bruce D Allan, Maninder Bhogal, Maria S Balda, Karl Matter, Bruce D Allan
Abstract
Purpose: To describe a novel method of global cell viability assessment for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and the comparison of two contemporary methods of donor tissue preparation.
Methods: DMEK transplants were prepared using two different methods: liquid bubble separation and manual peeling (n=8 each group). Samples were incubated with Hoechst, calcein-AM and ethidium homodimer prior to mounting on a curved imaging chamber. Z-stacked fluorescence microscopy images were combined to produce an in-focus global image capable of resolving all cell nuclei. Image processing software was used to define a calcein-positive live cell area, count all cell nuclei within this area and subtract ethidium-positive dead cells to derive the total viable endothelial cell count. Corrected global cell density was calculated by dividing the number of viable cells by the graft area, which had been corrected for imaging a curved surface.
Results: Corrected global cell density was lower than the central endothelial cell density in both groups: 85.5% of the pre-preparation central endothelial cell density in the peel group and 75.8% in the bubble group. Corrected global cell density was significantly lower in the liquid bubble separation group than in the peel group (p=0.04).
Conclusions: Eye bank estimations of central endothelial cell density overestimate true cell density after graft preparation in DMEK. A peel method is less damaging and more consistent than a liquid bubble method. Cell loss correlated strongly with the degree of stromal hydration prior to bubble separation in the liquid bubble group.
Keywords: Cornea; Eye (Tissue) Banking; Treatment Surgery.
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Figures
References
- Coster DJ, Lowe MT, Keane MC, et al. . A comparison of lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty outcomes: a registry study. Ophthalmology 2014;121:979–87. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.12.017
- Guerra FP, Anshu A, Price MO, et al. . Endothelial keratoplasty: fellow eyes comparison of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Cornea 2011; 30:1382–6. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31821ddd25
- Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW. Risk of corneal transplant rejection significantly reduced with Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Ophthalmology 2012;119:536–40. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.019
- Feng MT, Price MO, Miller JM, et al. . Air reinjection and endothelial cell density in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: five-year follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg 2014;40:1116–21. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.04.023
- Bourne WM. Cellular changes in transplanted human corneas. Cornea 2001;20:560–69. 10.1167/iovs.02-1255
- Armitage WJ, Dick AD, Bourne WM. Predicting endothelial cell loss and long-term corneal graft survival. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:3326–31. 10.1167/iovs.02-1255
- Albon J, Tullo AB, Aktar S, et al. . Apoptosis in the endothelium of human corneas for transplantation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41: 2887–93.
- Gain P, Thuret G, Chiquet C, et al. . Value of two mortality assessment techniques for organ cultured corneal endothelium: trypan blue versus TUNEL technique. Br J Ophthalmol 2002;86:306–10. 10.1136/bjo.86.3.306
- Thuret G, Chiquet C, Bernal F, et al. . Prospective, randomized clinical and endothelial evaluation of 2 storage times for corneal donor tissue in organ culture at 31°C. Arch Ophthalmol 2003;121:442–9. 10.1001/archopht.121.4.442
- Suwan-Apichon O, Reyes JMG, Griffin NB, et al. . Microkeratome preparation of lamellar corneal grafts. Eye Contact Lens 2006;32:248–9. 10.1097/01.icl.0000219364.21999.e4
- Terry MA, Saad HA, Shamie N, et al. . Peripheral endothelial cell damage after trephination of donor tissue. Cornea 2009;28:1149–52. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181a87a28
- Saad HA, Terry MA, Shamie N, et al. . An easy and inexpensive method for quantitative analysis of endothelial damage by using vital dye staining and Adobe Photoshop software. Cornea 2008;27:818–24. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181705ca2
- Alqudah AA, Terry MA, Straiko MD, et al. . Immediate endothelial cell loss after penetrating keratoplasty. Cornea 2013;32:1587–90. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3182a73822
- Terry MA, Saad HA, Shamie N, et al. . Endothelial keratoplasty: the influence of insertion techniques and incision size on donor endothelial survival. Cornea 2009;28:24–31. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e318182a4d3
- Nishimura JK, Hodge DO, Bourne WM. Initial endothelial cell density and chronic endothelial cell loss rate in corneal transplants with late endothelial failure. Ophthalmology 1999;106:1962–5. 10.1016/S0161-6420(99)90409-8
- Tenkman LR, MD FWPJ, Price MO. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty donor preparation: navigating challenges and improving efficiency. Cornea 2014;33:319–25. 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000045
- Yoeruek E, Bartz-Schmidt KU, Schmidt B. Novel surgical instruments facilitating Descemet membrane dissection. Cornea 2013;32:523–6. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3182588ae9
- Muraine M, Gueudry J, He Z, et al. . Novel technique for the preparation of corneal grafts for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 2013;156:851–9. 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.05.041
- Busin M, Scorcia V, Patel AK, et al. . Donor tissue preparation for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. Br J Ophthalmol 2011;95:1172–3; author reply 1173 10.1136/bjo.2010.195651
- Parekh M, Ruzza A, Salvalaio G, et al. . Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty tissue preparation from donor corneas using a standardized submerged hydro-separation method. Am J Ophthalmol 2014;158:277–285.e1. 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.04.009
- Spence DJ, Peyman GA. A new technique for the vital staining of the corneal endothelium. Invest Ophthalmol 1976;15:1000–2.
- Sperling S. Early morphological changes in organ cultured human corneal endothelium. Acta Ophthalmol 1978;56:785–92. 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1978.tb06643.x
- Amann J, Holley GP, Lee S-B, et al. . Increased endothelial cell density in the paracentral and peripheral regions of the human cornea. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;135:584–90. 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)02237-7
- Pipparelli A, Thuret G, Toubeau D, et al. . Pan-corneal endothelial viability assessment: application to endothelial grafts predissected by eye banks. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:6018–25. 10.1167/iovs.10-6641
- Doughman DJ. Prolonged donor cornea preservation in organ culture: long-term clinical evaluation. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1980;78:567–628.
- Yoeruek E, Bayyoud T, Hofmann J, et al. . Comparison of pneumatic dissection and forceps dissection in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty: histological and ultrastructural findings. Cornea 2012;31:920–5. 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31823f7870
- Jardine GJ, Holiman JD, Stoeger CG, et al. . Imaging and quantification of endothelial cell loss in eye bank prepared DMEK grafts using trainable segmentation software. Curr Eye Res 2014;39:894–901. 10.3109/02713683.2014.887120
- Kobayashi A, Murata N, Yokogawa H, et al. . Evaluation of internationally shipped prestripped donor tissue for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty by vital dye staining. Cornea 2015;34:225–7. 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000330
- Lie JT, Birbal R, Ham L, et al. . Donor tissue preparation for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008;34:1578–83. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.05.036
- Koh S-WM, Gloria D, Molloy J. Corneal endothelial autocrine VIP enhances its integrity in stored human donor corneoscleral explant. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:5632–40. 10.1167/iovs.10-5983
Source: PubMed