gms | German Medical Science

102. Jahrestagung der DOG

Deutsche Ophthalmologische Gesellschaft e. V.

23. bis 26.09.2004, Berlin

10 years of experience with keratoprostheses

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author K. Hille - Augenklinik der Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes, Homburg (Saar)
  • K.W. Ruprecht - Augenklinik der Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes, Homburg (Saar)

Evidenzbasierte Medizin - Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. 102. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft. Berlin, 23.-26.09.2004. Düsseldorf, Köln: German Medical Science; 2004. Doc04dogFR.09.12

Die elektronische Version dieses Artikels ist vollständig und ist verfügbar unter:

Veröffentlicht: 22. September 2004

© 2004 Hille et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen ( Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.




In Patients with severe ocular surface disorders like severe dry eye, symblepharon or diffuse vaskularisation the results of ocular reconstruction by corneal grafts or limbal stem cell transplantation are limited. In those patients a keratoprosthesis (Kpro) may be suitable for the recovery of vision. A KPro usually consists of an optic cylinder and a haptic made of biocompatible or biologic material like tibiabone (TKpro) or dentine (OOKP) to retain the optic in the surface of the body. Due to our experience we wanted to grade the value of different KPro.


In the last 10 years we implanted 35 KPro, 29 with biologic haptic (25 OOKP and 4 TKPro), and 6 KPro with biocompatible haptic (1 LEGAIS's KPro, 5 PINTUCCI's KPro). There was a follow-up examination about every half a year.


The patients gained a visual acuity of ≥0,9 in 20,6%, of ≥0,5 in 52,9%, of ≥0,2 in 61,8% a significant improvement of the visual acuity in 76,5% respectively. There was no significant difference between the different types of KPros concerning the visual acuity, but all patients with a poor improvement had a pre-existing end stage glaucoma or other visual impairing pre-existing ocular diseases. The medium follow-up of OOKP was 3 years (max. 8) and of TKPro 1 year. In this time none of the KPro with biologic haptic was lost, but 3 of 6 of the KPro with biocompatible haptic with a maximum of follow-up of 2 years (1 LEGAIS's after 6 month and 2 of the PINTUCCI's; p<0,01).


Most important in ranking of KPro's different types are the percentage and duration of the anatomic success as visual acuity will be similar as long as a KPro is in site. The fixation of the KPro by a root of the patients own tooth (OOKP) will leed to the best results in the long-term follow-up as our results as well as the literature demonstrates.