

On the survival of penetrating corneal grafts: analysis of clinical cases
https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2025-3-222-230
Abstract
Background. Selective keratoplasty techniques, in which only the affected corneal layers are replaced, are increasingly used in modern corneal transplantation. In penetrating keratoplasty (PK), however, all layers of a structurally altered cornea are replaced with a donor graft. PK remains the only surgical option for many severe anterior segment conditions, including advanced keratoconus, corneal ulcer with stromal melting and/or perforation, and corneal opacities of various origins involving the full corneal thickness. Purpose: to report clinical cases of penetrating corneal grafts with transparency preserved for more than 20 years. Materials and methods. In 2024, 19 patients (24 eyes) with penetrating corneal grafts performed by the authors more than 20 years earlier (20– 35 years) were examined. The cohort included 10 men and 9 women. In all cases, fresh (non-stored) donor corneas were used, with a death-to-surgery interval of less than 24 hours. The graft diameter was ≥8 mm in all eyes. The primary diagnosis was advanced keratoconus (stage IV by Amsler, or post-hydrops scarring) in 13 patients. The remaining six patients had dense corneal scars and opacities due to penetrating trauma, severe keratitis, or ulcers (including cases with perforation). Results. In all 24 eyes, the corneal grafts remained transparent; two cases showed progressive endothelial graft dysfunction. Five representative cases of ultra-longterm graft survival and one case of bilateral reconstructive PK performed in Minsk, Republic of Belarus (1 and 8 years post-surgery), are illustrated. Conclusion. Penetrating keratoplasty with fresh donor corneas of high endothelial cell density provides the potential for successful graft survival with long-term–and even ultra-long-term–maintenance of transparency. In keratoconus, refractive PK may result in lower post-keratoplasty ametropia, better visual function, and a reduced risk of ectasia recurrence.
About the Authors
Y. B. SlonimskiyRussian Federation
Yuri B. Slonimskiy, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Ophthalmologist
2/1, bldg. 1, Barrikadnaya Str., Moscow, 123242
5, 2nd Botkinsky travel, Moscow, 125284
G. Sh. Arzhimatova
Russian Federation
Gulzhiyan Sh. Arzhimatova, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Head of the Moscow City Ophthalmological Center
2/1, bldg. 1, Barrikadnaya Str., Moscow, 123242
5, 2nd Botkinsky travel, Moscow, 125284
A. Yu. Slonimskiy
Russian Federation
Alexei Yu. Slonimskiy, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Ophthalmologist
8, bldg. 1, Kholzunova lane, Moscow, 119021
E. A. Salikhov
Russian Federation
Eldar A. Salikhov, Deputy Head for Medical Affairs
5, 2nd Botkinsky travel, Moscow, 125284
A. S. Slonimskaya
Russian Federation
Anastasia S. Slonimskaya, 2nd year resident
5, 2nd Botkinsky travel, Moscow, 125284
References
1. Ple-Plakon PA, Shtein RM. Trends in corneal transplantation: indications and techniques. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2014;25(4):300–305. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000080
2. Park CY, Lee JK, Gore PK, et al. Keratoplasty in the United States: a 10-year review from 2005 through 2014. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(12):2432–2442. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.08.017
3. Gao H, Huang T, Pan Z, et al. Survey report on keratoplasty in China: a 5-year review from 2014 to 2018. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0239939. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239939
4. Singh R, Gupta N, Vanathi M, Tandon R. Corneal transplantation in the modern era. Indian J Med Res. 2019;150(1):7–22. doi: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_141_19
5. Mathews PM, Lindsley K, Aldave AJ, Akpek EK. Etiology of global corneal blindness and current practices of corneal transplantation: a focused review. Cornea. 2018;37(9):1198–1203. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001666
6. Flockerzi E, Maier P, Böhringer D, et al. Trends in corneal transplantation from 2001 to 2016 in Germany: a report of the DOG-section cornea and its keratoplasty registry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2018;188:91–98. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2018.01.018
7. Koulouri I, Hellwinkel OJC. A brief review of corneal transplantation: techniques, indications and methods of corneal preservation. J Transl Sci. 2020;6:1–4. doi: 10.15761/JTS.1000387
8. Oganesyan OG, Makarov PV, Grdikanyan AA, et al. The partial transplantation of Descemet’s membrane with endothelium (½ and ¼ DMEK). Rossiiskii meditsinskii zhurnal (Medical Journal of the Russian Federation, Russian journal). 2018;24(2):78– 82 (In Russ.). doi: 10.18821/0869-2106-2018-24-2-78-82
9. Oganesyan OG, Yakovleva SS, Kharlampidi MP, Grdikanyan AA. The rationale application of donor material: original ten years experience, possible ways of development and literature data. Rossiiskiy meditsinskii zhurnal (Russian Medical Journal of the Russian Federation. 2016;22(4):193–197 (In Russ.). doi: 10.18821/0869-2106-2016-22-4-193-197
10. Heinzelmann S, Böhringer D, Eberwein P, et al. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty for graft failure following penetrating keratoplasty. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017;255(5):979–985. doi: 10.1007/s00417-017-3600-6
11. Oganesyan OG, Getadaryan VR, Makarov PV, Grdikanyan AA. Bowman layer transplantation in eyes with progressive advanced keratoconus. Russ Ophthalmol J. 2019;12(4):43–50 (In Russ.). doi: 10.21516/2072-0076-2019-12-4-43-50
12. Williams KA, Muehlberg SM, Lewis RF, Coster DJ. How successful is corneal transplantation? A report from the Australian Corneal Graft Register. Eye (Lond). 1995;9(Pt 2):219–227. doi: 10.1038/eye.1995.43
13. Williams KA, Lowe M, Bartlett C, Kelly TL, Coster DJ; All Contributors. Risk factors for human corneal graft failure within the Australian corneal graft registry. Transplantation. 2008;86(12):1720–1724. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181903b0a
14. Malyugin BE, Sakhnov SN, Myasnikova VV, et al. Corneal graft survival analysis after penetrating keratoplasty in a retrospective cohort study. Oftalmokhirurgiia. 2021;4:12–20 (In Russ.). doi: 10.25276/0235-4160-2021-4-12-20
15. Bikbov MM, Usubov EL, Zaynetdinov AF. Penetrating and anterior lamellar keratoplasty (review). Tochka Zreniya. Vostok – Zapad. 2019;1:89–92 (In Russ.). doi: 10.25276/2410-1257-2019-1-89-92
16. Gomes JAP, Tan D, Rapuano CJ, et al. Global consensus on keratoconus and ectatic diseases. Cornea. 2015;34(4):359– 369. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000408
17. Slonimsky YuB, Gerasimov AS. Refractive penetrating keratoplasty. Keratoconus surgery. Calculation tables. Moscow: Novella; 1992. 222 p. (In Russ.)
18. Borderie VM, Boëlle PY, Touzeau O, et al. Predicted longterm outcome of corneal transplantation. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(12):2354–2360. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.05.009
19. Krumeich JH, Daniel J, Knülle A. Live-epikeratophakia for keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998;24(4):456–463. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(98)80284-8
20. Budnikova EA, Trufanov SV, Rozinova VN, et al. Methods of cadaver donor cornea evaluation for keratoplasty (literature review). Ophthalmol J. 2018;11(4):67–73 (In Russ.). doi: 10.17816/OV11467-73
21. Mamikonian VR, Osipian GA, Doguzov VA, et al. Objective assessment of donor material for penetrating corneal transplantation. Ann Ophthalmol. 2017;133(6):76–82 (In Russ.). doi: 10.17116/oftalma2017133676-82
22. Anshu A, Price MO, Price FW. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty and hybrid techniques for managing failed penetrating grafts. Cornea. 2013;32(1):1–4. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e3182488888
23. Einan-Lifshitz A, Belkin A, Sorkin N, et al. Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty after penetrating keratoplasty: features for success. Cornea. 2018;37(9):1093–1097. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001628
24. Schrittenlocher S, Schlereth SL, Siebelmann S, et al. Longterm outcome of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) following failed penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Acta Ophthalmol. 2020;98(5):e549–e554. doi: 10.1111/aos.14417
25. Weller JM, Hübner L, Kruse FE, et al. Characterisation of ectasia after penetrating keratoplasty in keratoconus eyes using anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Br J Ophthalmol. 2023;107(6):781–786. doi: 10.1136/bjo-2022-322859
26. Oganesyan OG. Endokeratoplasty as an alternative to pene trating rekeratoplasty. Ophthalmology. 2009;6(2):15–21 (In Russ.).
27. Slonimsky AYu, Averich VV. Experience of using scleral contact lenses in keratoconus in combination with dry eye syndrome. Ophthalmol Russ. 2024;21(3):546–552 (In Russ.). doi: 10.18008/1816-5095-2024-3-546-552
28. Slonimsky YuB, Gerasimov AS. Refractive penetrating keratoplasty. Keratoconus surgery. Calculation tables. Moscow: Novella; 1992. 222 p. (In Russ.).
29. Yüksel B, Bozyaka EAH, Küsbeci T, Gümüs F. Late corneal ectasia after penetrating and deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty for keratoconus. Int J Ophthalmol. 2024;17(10):1828–1836. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2024.10.08
30. Moramarco A, Gardini L, Iannetta D, et al. Post penetrating keratoplasty ectasia: incidence, risk factors, clinical features, and treatment options. J Clin Med. 2022;11(10):2678. doi: 10.3390/jcm11102678
Review
For citations:
Slonimskiy Y.B., Arzhimatova G.Sh., Slonimskiy A.Yu., Salikhov E.A., Slonimskaya A.S. On the survival of penetrating corneal grafts: analysis of clinical cases. The EYE GLAZ. 2025;27(3):222-230. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33791/2222-4408-2025-3-222-230