Case-control study of subconjunctival triamcinolone acetonide injection vs intravenous methylprednisolone pulse in the treatment of endothelial corneal allograft rejection

dc.creatorCosta, DC
dc.creatorde Castro, RS
dc.creatorKara-Jose, N
dc.date2009
dc.dateMAR
dc.date2014-11-14T09:26:58Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:14:11Z
dc.date2014-11-14T09:26:58Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:14:11Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-29T00:02:30Z
dc.date.available2018-03-29T00:02:30Z
dc.identifierEye. Nature Publishing Group, v. 23, n. 3, n. 708, n. 714, 2009.
dc.identifier0950-222X
dc.identifierWOS:000264119500036
dc.identifier10.1038/eye.2008.289
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/78481
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/handle/REPOSIP/78481
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/78481
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1281750
dc.descriptionPurpose To assess the safety and effectiveness of treating corneal endothelial rejection with a subconjunctival injection of 20mg triamcinolone acetonide in combination with topical application of 1% prednisolone acetate, as compared to treatment with an intravenous pulse of 500 mg methylprednisolone in combination with topical application of 1% prednisolone acetate. Methods A case-controlled study including a literature review was performed. Patients who presented with an initial episode of corneal endothelial rejection were treated with subconjunctival injection of 20mg triamcinolone in combination with topically applied 1% prednisolone and were retrospectively matched for age and diagnosis to patients who received a single intravenous injection of 500 mg methylprednisolone in combination with topical 1% prednisolone. Patients were analysed regarding reversion of the rejection episode, intraocular pressure, and visual acuity after 1 year. Results Overall, the triamcinolone group had a better outcome regarding reversion of corneal transplant rejection (P = 0.025), with 15 of 16 patients in the triamcinolone group having clear grafts, compared to only 10 of 16 patients in the methylprednisolone group. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was increased in both groups at day 30 (P = 0.002), although there was no statistically significant difference in IOP between the groups (P = 0.433). Visual acuity improved in both groups after 1 year (P = 0.049), although slightly more improvement was observed in the triamcinolone group (P = 0.002). Conclusions The results observed in this case-controlled study suggest that the use of subconjunctival triamcinolone acetonide may benefit patients with corneal transplant rejection.
dc.description23
dc.description3
dc.description708
dc.description714
dc.languageen
dc.publisherNature Publishing Group
dc.publisherLondon
dc.publisherInglaterra
dc.relationEye
dc.relationEye
dc.rightsfechado
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectkeratoplasty
dc.subjectgraft rejection
dc.subjecttriamcinolone acetonide
dc.subjectmethylprednisolone
dc.subjectOral Cyclosporine-a
dc.subjectGraft-rejection
dc.subjectRisk-factors
dc.subjectIntravitreal Injection
dc.subjectPenetrating Keratoplasty
dc.subjectTransplantation
dc.subjectPrevention
dc.subjectCorticosteroids
dc.subjectManagement
dc.subjectKeratitis
dc.titleCase-control study of subconjunctival triamcinolone acetonide injection vs intravenous methylprednisolone pulse in the treatment of endothelial corneal allograft rejection
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución