A systematic literature review of surgical interventions for limbal stem cell deficiency in humans

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relative benefits and to identify any adverse effects of surgical interventions for limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD).

DESIGN: Systematic literature review.

METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases from January 1, 1989 through September 30, 2006: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science citation index, BIOSIS, and the Cochrane Library. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify any additional reports. The quality of published reports was assessed using standard methods. The main outcome measure was improvement in vision of at least two Snellen lines of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Data on adverse outcomes also were collected.

RESULTS: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. There were no randomized controlled studies. All 26 studies were either prospective or retrospective case series. For bilateral severe LSCD, keratolimbal allograft was the most common intervention with systemic immunosuppression. Other interventions included eccentric penetrating keratolimbal allografts and cultivated autologous oral mucosal epithelial grafts. An improvement in BCVA of two lines or more was reported in 31% to 67% of eyes. For unilateral severe LSCD, the most common surgical intervention was contralateral conjunctival limbal autograft, with 35% to 88% of eyes gaining an improvement in BCVA of two lines or more. The only study evaluating partial LSCD showed an improvement in BCVA of two lines or more in 39% of eyes.

CONCLUSIONS: Studies to date have not provided strong evidence to guide clinical practice on which surgery is most beneficial to treat various types of LSCD. Standardized data collection in a multicenter LSCD register is suggested.

Preserving arteriovenous fistula outcomes during surgical training

PURPOSE: Arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) are the preferred option for vascular access, as they are associated with lower mortality in hemodialysis patients than in those patients with arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) or central venous catheters (CVCs). We sought to assess whether vascular access outcomes for surgical trainees are comparable to fully trained surgeons.

METHODS: A prospectively collected database of patients was created and information recorded regarding patient demographics, past medical history, preoperative investigations, grade of operating surgeon, type of AVF formed, primary AVF function, cumulative AVF survival and functional patency.

RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-two patients were identified as having had vascular access procedures during the 6 month study period and 143 were included in the final analysis. Secondary AVF patency was established in 123 (86%) of these AVFs and 89 (62.2%) were used for dialysis. There was no significant difference in survival of AVFs according to training status of surgeon (log rank x2 0.506 p=0.477) or type of AVF (log rank x2 0.341 p=0.559). Patency rates of successful AVFs at 1 and 2 years were 60.9% and 47.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated in this prospective study that there are no significant differences in outcomes of primary AVFs formed by fully trained surgeons versus surgical trainees. Creation of a primary AVF represents an excellent training platform for intermediate stage surgeons across general and vascular surgical specialties.