Indications of corneal transplant for irreparable corneal affections in small animals were already mentioned in earlier literature
(Townsend et al., 2008; Gelatt et al., 2013; Maggs, 2018). In present study, fresh (n=3, C1 to C3) and frozen grafts (n=3, C4 to C6) were applied in equal distribution and independent of type of corneal affection. Size of affected cornea was also calculated in four-cases (mean was 6.87±1.22 mm, median was 6.2 mm, ranges from 4.9 to 10.2 mm) whereas in two cases (C2 and C4) it was not possible because of complete cornea involvement. The mean surgical time was recorded as 73.33±14.25 minutes. All the grafts were stabilised with the help of absorbable sutures (size- 8-0, polyglactin 910). In research of
Lacerda et al., (2016) on penetrating keratoplasty, similar to present study, polyglactin 910 (9-0 in their study, but 8-0 in present study) absorbable suture material was applied to stabilize the graft but they followed cardinal suture pattern (12-6-9-3 O’clock positions).
Townsend et al., (2008) transplanted cornea for treatment of feline sequestrum and used non-absorbable polyamide (9-0) sutures.
McEntyre (1968) applied 7-0 silk sutures in canine cornea transplant. They placed simple interrupted pattern in few millimetre gap (1-2 mm). In present study, the mean value of number of sutures used during FTKP to affix the donor cornea with recipients’ bed was recorded as 8.83±1.01, with median of 9 ranges from 6 to 12 (in numbers). In a study (
McEntyre, 1968) on experimental keratoplasty on dogs, range of total number of interrupted sutures was 8 to 16 along with continuous suture application. In his study, wound leakage and out-riding of donor edges were reported even after use of total 16 simple interrupted sutures. However such intra-operative complications might remained undiagnosed in present study hence not documented.
Mueller and Formston (1969) explained that a more satisfactory method of preparing donor full-thickness graft was to trephine the transplant tissue from endothelial side of donor corneal button (corneal trephine should be firmly placed over the endothelium and then disk is punched out) which was similarly followed in present study. Procedure of cornea collection was also similarly followed in accordance to their study and they described that cornea with a rim of sclera should be dissected from intact globe; the ciliary body adherent to the scleral rim should be removed together with iris and lens. Many hurdles and complications like intra-operative iatrogenic damage to lens and vitreous (C5), faulty entry into anterior chamber (C1, C2 and C5), intra-operative iris protrusion (C5), difficulty to identify the exact epithelial and endothelial surface of donor corneal button after harvesting and thus the button was not utilized ahead (C4), oedematous/swellon donor corneal button (C4 to C6) and difficulty in placement of suture knot due to oedematous margins of recipients’ cornea and donor corneal button (C4 to C6) were recorded as Intra-operative complications. All these complications were similarly reported in research of
Qureshi (2020) on canine keratoplasties. The mean value of donor graft size (in diameter) utilized in FTKP was recorded as 9.58 ± 0.49 mm. Same value is recorded as size of trephines for donor button retrieval. The mean value of recipient’s bed size was 9.08 ± 0.49 mm. In research of
Lacerda et al., (2016), graft size ranged from 3 to 15 mm (median 7.5 mm). Donor graft must be larger than the recipients’ bed which ranged from 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm in previous literature (
McEntyre, 1968;
Mueller and Formston, 1969;
Gelatt et al., 2013; Lacerda et al., 2016; Qureshi 2020) because graft-shrinkage during post-operative period.
McEntyre (1968) utilized 7.0 mm corneal trephine for a depth of 0.4 mm for incision in recipient’s cornea. He mentioned that to minimize damage and save maximum of endothelial cells, recipient’s button was excised with a bevelled incision.
Previous researchers (
McEntyre, 1968;
Mueller and Formston, 1969;
Coster, 1981;
Gelatt et al., 2013; Lacerda et al., 2016) stated that irreversible oedema, graft reaction (invasion of blood vessels towards donor tissue) and graft-opacity/fibrosis were considered as gross clinical signs of graft rejections after FTKP. The main reason behind all these clinical signs was considered as endothelial destruction which is usually not easy to identify. Similar clinical signs were also reported in present study in post-operative periods. Association of graft failure with numbers of invaded vessels in postoperative period in per cornea quadrant (away from limbus at least 2mm) was considered as risk factors of graft rejection in earlier studies ((
McEntyre 1968). Similarly in present study grafts were invaded by vessels within a week of surgery.
Total 4-dogs of present study were survived whereas 2-dogs died in later period due to other systemic causes. The mean time of disappearance of corneal sutures or mean value of time taken to dissolve absorbable sutures was recorded as 37.6±3.26 days. The surgical Procedure and long term follow-up of penetrating keratoplasty in dog affected with Bullous keratopathy (C1) is shown in Fig 1.
Postoperatively, overall corneal clarity score 2, 3 and 4 was reported in total 1-case (C3; upto 1-month, afterwards dog died), 2-cases (C1 and C6) and 3-cases (C2, C4 and C6) respectively (Fig 3). Up to 1-months total 3-cases (C1, C2 and C6) showed positive menace reflex. 2-cases died and excluded from follow-up statistics (Table 2). In total 2-cases (C1 and C6) were reported with sluggish menace reflexes. Therefore, postoperatively visual outcome was 50% (2/4) and tectonic outcome was 100% (4/4) in present study. Post-operatively, mean value of corneal pigmentation score (for 4-cases, C1, C2, C5 and C6) was 9.00±1.58 (Fig 2). Pre-operatively visual outcome was recorded as 33.33% (2/6) which was remained same in post-operative period up to 6-months of follow-up. Moreover topical steroid was advised for long term application to reduce the scar/opacity but prolonged outcome was not available.There was only one report
(Lacerda et al., 2016) in which rate of graft-failure/rejection has been mentioned as 56% which was almost similar to medical practice (
Wilson and Kaufman, 1990;
Panda et al., 2007) but many reports of medical science possess comparatively less rejection rates than veterinary practice (
McEntyre, 1968;
Mueller and Formston, 1969;
Gelatt et al., 2013; Lacerda et al., 2016; Qureshi, 2020).