Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits

Purpose Preoperative counselling for penetrating keratoplasty should include awareness of symptoms and signs of possible complications as early presentation can enhance long-term success. In our corneal transplantation service, all patients are routinely instructed to arrange a same day emergency vi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Eye (London) 2007-08, Vol.21 (8), p.1028-1032
Hauptverfasser: Gnanaraj, L, Sandhu, S, Hildreth, A J, Figueiredo, F C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1032
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1028
container_title Eye (London)
container_volume 21
creator Gnanaraj, L
Sandhu, S
Hildreth, A J
Figueiredo, F C
description Purpose Preoperative counselling for penetrating keratoplasty should include awareness of symptoms and signs of possible complications as early presentation can enhance long-term success. In our corneal transplantation service, all patients are routinely instructed to arrange a same day emergency visit through a dedicated telephone line if they experience any symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. This study was designed to evaluate the reason for presentation, management outcome of each visit and the efficiency of the system in management of postkeratoplasty complications. Methods A review of 100 consecutive emergency visits by postpenetrating keratoplasty (PKP) patients in a tertiary eye care centre was included. Results Sixty-two patients with varied preoperative diagnoses presented during the review period. Sixteen visits were within the first month after surgery and 40 visits within the first year. Ten patients (16%) sought consultation more than twice during the study period with one patient presenting five times. Pain and grittiness were the main presenting symptoms (68%). Loose corneal suture (25%) necessitating removal was the most common diagnosis. Sixteen visits resulted in hospital admission for treatment. The graft survived in all patients and the visual acuity was preserved in 95% of our patients. Conclusion Most corneal surgeons educate their patients to seek prompt treatment for symptoms such as redness, sensitivity to light, loss of vision, pain, or any other symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. Early intervention of sight threatening complications increases the chance of graft survival and best-obtained vision. This review shows a simple open access system facilitates early presentation and successful management of postgraft complications.
doi_str_mv 10.1038/sj.eye.6702546
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68144271</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1317203591</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-7f53ce89cc8d132d4eb0ac73aa77889c81cd6841bb7ffea8c2e12f3f83f7ee763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10EtLAzEQB_AgitbH1aMsgt625rVJepTiCwQ9KHgLaTqRrdvdmtmt9OaH8BP6SYx0oSB4Gsj8MjP8CTlmdMioMBc4G8IKhkpTXki1RQZMapUXspDbZEBHBc055y97ZB9xRmlqarpL9pgaCaWkHJDrxwbbN4iubRaVw3aVwRziK9R-lS1LLFv8_vxyWYRlCR9ZEzJGaeabGsF3bbmEHh2SneAqhKO-HpDn66un8W1-_3BzN768z70UtM11KIQHM_LeTJngUwkT6rwWzmlt0rNhfqqMZJOJDgGc8RwYDyIYETSAVuKAnK_nLmLz3gG2dl6ih6pyNTQdWmWYlFyzBE__wFnTxTrdZjkzQirFdULDNfKxQYwQ7CKWcxdXllH7G6_FmU3x2j7e9OGkn9pN5jDd8D7PBM564NC7KkRX-xI3zoyMYlokd7F2mFr1K8TNef-s_gErxpUe</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>218346627</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals (MCLS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Gnanaraj, L ; Sandhu, S ; Hildreth, A J ; Figueiredo, F C</creator><creatorcontrib>Gnanaraj, L ; Sandhu, S ; Hildreth, A J ; Figueiredo, F C</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose Preoperative counselling for penetrating keratoplasty should include awareness of symptoms and signs of possible complications as early presentation can enhance long-term success. In our corneal transplantation service, all patients are routinely instructed to arrange a same day emergency visit through a dedicated telephone line if they experience any symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. This study was designed to evaluate the reason for presentation, management outcome of each visit and the efficiency of the system in management of postkeratoplasty complications. Methods A review of 100 consecutive emergency visits by postpenetrating keratoplasty (PKP) patients in a tertiary eye care centre was included. Results Sixty-two patients with varied preoperative diagnoses presented during the review period. Sixteen visits were within the first month after surgery and 40 visits within the first year. Ten patients (16%) sought consultation more than twice during the study period with one patient presenting five times. Pain and grittiness were the main presenting symptoms (68%). Loose corneal suture (25%) necessitating removal was the most common diagnosis. Sixteen visits resulted in hospital admission for treatment. The graft survived in all patients and the visual acuity was preserved in 95% of our patients. Conclusion Most corneal surgeons educate their patients to seek prompt treatment for symptoms such as redness, sensitivity to light, loss of vision, pain, or any other symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. Early intervention of sight threatening complications increases the chance of graft survival and best-obtained vision. This review shows a simple open access system facilitates early presentation and successful management of postgraft complications.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-222X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5454</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702546</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16936644</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EYEEEC</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biological and medical sciences ; Emergencies ; Emergency Treatment ; Female ; Graft Survival - physiology ; Hotlines ; Humans ; Keratoplasty, Penetrating - adverse effects ; Laboratory Medicine ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Ophthalmology ; Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology ; Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control ; Preoperative Care - education ; review ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology ; Treatment Outcome ; Visual Acuity - physiology</subject><ispartof>Eye (London), 2007-08, Vol.21 (8), p.1028-1032</ispartof><rights>Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2007</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Nature Publishing Group Aug 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-7f53ce89cc8d132d4eb0ac73aa77889c81cd6841bb7ffea8c2e12f3f83f7ee763</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-7f53ce89cc8d132d4eb0ac73aa77889c81cd6841bb7ffea8c2e12f3f83f7ee763</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1038/sj.eye.6702546$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1038/sj.eye.6702546$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18986173$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16936644$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gnanaraj, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandhu, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hildreth, A J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, F C</creatorcontrib><title>Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits</title><title>Eye (London)</title><addtitle>Eye</addtitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><description>Purpose Preoperative counselling for penetrating keratoplasty should include awareness of symptoms and signs of possible complications as early presentation can enhance long-term success. In our corneal transplantation service, all patients are routinely instructed to arrange a same day emergency visit through a dedicated telephone line if they experience any symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. This study was designed to evaluate the reason for presentation, management outcome of each visit and the efficiency of the system in management of postkeratoplasty complications. Methods A review of 100 consecutive emergency visits by postpenetrating keratoplasty (PKP) patients in a tertiary eye care centre was included. Results Sixty-two patients with varied preoperative diagnoses presented during the review period. Sixteen visits were within the first month after surgery and 40 visits within the first year. Ten patients (16%) sought consultation more than twice during the study period with one patient presenting five times. Pain and grittiness were the main presenting symptoms (68%). Loose corneal suture (25%) necessitating removal was the most common diagnosis. Sixteen visits resulted in hospital admission for treatment. The graft survived in all patients and the visual acuity was preserved in 95% of our patients. Conclusion Most corneal surgeons educate their patients to seek prompt treatment for symptoms such as redness, sensitivity to light, loss of vision, pain, or any other symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. Early intervention of sight threatening complications increases the chance of graft survival and best-obtained vision. This review shows a simple open access system facilitates early presentation and successful management of postgraft complications.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Emergencies</subject><subject>Emergency Treatment</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Graft Survival - physiology</subject><subject>Hotlines</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Keratoplasty, Penetrating - adverse effects</subject><subject>Laboratory Medicine</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Preoperative Care - education</subject><subject>review</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Visual Acuity - physiology</subject><issn>0950-222X</issn><issn>1476-5454</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp10EtLAzEQB_AgitbH1aMsgt625rVJepTiCwQ9KHgLaTqRrdvdmtmt9OaH8BP6SYx0oSB4Gsj8MjP8CTlmdMioMBc4G8IKhkpTXki1RQZMapUXspDbZEBHBc055y97ZB9xRmlqarpL9pgaCaWkHJDrxwbbN4iubRaVw3aVwRziK9R-lS1LLFv8_vxyWYRlCR9ZEzJGaeabGsF3bbmEHh2SneAqhKO-HpDn66un8W1-_3BzN768z70UtM11KIQHM_LeTJngUwkT6rwWzmlt0rNhfqqMZJOJDgGc8RwYDyIYETSAVuKAnK_nLmLz3gG2dl6ih6pyNTQdWmWYlFyzBE__wFnTxTrdZjkzQirFdULDNfKxQYwQ7CKWcxdXllH7G6_FmU3x2j7e9OGkn9pN5jDd8D7PBM564NC7KkRX-xI3zoyMYlokd7F2mFr1K8TNef-s_gErxpUe</recordid><startdate>20070801</startdate><enddate>20070801</enddate><creator>Gnanaraj, L</creator><creator>Sandhu, S</creator><creator>Hildreth, A J</creator><creator>Figueiredo, F C</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070801</creationdate><title>Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits</title><author>Gnanaraj, L ; Sandhu, S ; Hildreth, A J ; Figueiredo, F C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-7f53ce89cc8d132d4eb0ac73aa77889c81cd6841bb7ffea8c2e12f3f83f7ee763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Emergencies</topic><topic>Emergency Treatment</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Graft Survival - physiology</topic><topic>Hotlines</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Keratoplasty, Penetrating - adverse effects</topic><topic>Laboratory Medicine</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Preoperative Care - education</topic><topic>review</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Visual Acuity - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gnanaraj, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandhu, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hildreth, A J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, F C</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gnanaraj, L</au><au>Sandhu, S</au><au>Hildreth, A J</au><au>Figueiredo, F C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits</atitle><jtitle>Eye (London)</jtitle><stitle>Eye</stitle><addtitle>Eye (Lond)</addtitle><date>2007-08-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1028</spage><epage>1032</epage><pages>1028-1032</pages><issn>0950-222X</issn><eissn>1476-5454</eissn><coden>EYEEEC</coden><abstract>Purpose Preoperative counselling for penetrating keratoplasty should include awareness of symptoms and signs of possible complications as early presentation can enhance long-term success. In our corneal transplantation service, all patients are routinely instructed to arrange a same day emergency visit through a dedicated telephone line if they experience any symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. This study was designed to evaluate the reason for presentation, management outcome of each visit and the efficiency of the system in management of postkeratoplasty complications. Methods A review of 100 consecutive emergency visits by postpenetrating keratoplasty (PKP) patients in a tertiary eye care centre was included. Results Sixty-two patients with varied preoperative diagnoses presented during the review period. Sixteen visits were within the first month after surgery and 40 visits within the first year. Ten patients (16%) sought consultation more than twice during the study period with one patient presenting five times. Pain and grittiness were the main presenting symptoms (68%). Loose corneal suture (25%) necessitating removal was the most common diagnosis. Sixteen visits resulted in hospital admission for treatment. The graft survived in all patients and the visual acuity was preserved in 95% of our patients. Conclusion Most corneal surgeons educate their patients to seek prompt treatment for symptoms such as redness, sensitivity to light, loss of vision, pain, or any other symptoms in eyes that have undergone keratoplasty. Early intervention of sight threatening complications increases the chance of graft survival and best-obtained vision. This review shows a simple open access system facilitates early presentation and successful management of postgraft complications.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>16936644</pmid><doi>10.1038/sj.eye.6702546</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0950-222X
ispartof Eye (London), 2007-08, Vol.21 (8), p.1028-1032
issn 0950-222X
1476-5454
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68144271
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals (MCLS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biological and medical sciences
Emergencies
Emergency Treatment
Female
Graft Survival - physiology
Hotlines
Humans
Keratoplasty, Penetrating - adverse effects
Laboratory Medicine
Male
Medical sciences
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous
Ophthalmology
Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology
Postoperative Complications - prevention & control
Preoperative Care - education
review
Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Treatment Outcome
Visual Acuity - physiology
title Postkeratoplasty emergency visits—a review of 100 consecutive visits
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T03%3A29%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Postkeratoplasty%20emergency%20visits%E2%80%94a%20review%20of%20100%20consecutive%20visits&rft.jtitle=Eye%20(London)&rft.au=Gnanaraj,%20L&rft.date=2007-08-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1028&rft.epage=1032&rft.pages=1028-1032&rft.issn=0950-222X&rft.eissn=1476-5454&rft.coden=EYEEEC&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/sj.eye.6702546&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1317203591%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=218346627&rft_id=info:pmid/16936644&rfr_iscdi=true