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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Eye (London) 2007-08, Vol.21 (8), p.1028-1032 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 & 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</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&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 & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - prevention & 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 & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - prevention & 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 & 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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & 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 |