Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 47, No. 3, 2012
Issue release date: March 2012

The Effects of Corneal Endothelium on Graft Survival in a Murine Model of Lamellar Keratoplasty

Huang T. · Lee E.J. · Planck S.R. · Rosenbaum J.T.
To view the fulltext, log in and/or choose pay-per-view option

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Purpose: Here we investigate the role of donor endothelium on allograft rejection in a lamellar keratoplasty (LK) model using grafts with or without donor endothelium. Methods: Corneal buttons of donor C57BL/6 mice (2.0 mm) were transplanted to lamellar recipient beds (1.5 mm) in BALB/c mice. Two variations of the LK procedure were performed: (1) standard LK (SLK) (n = 13) without donor endothelium and (2) modified LK (MLK) (n = 14) with retained donor endothelium. The graft status was assessed by slit lamp biomicroscopy and scored for stromal opacity, corneal edema, neovascularization, and anterior chamber reaction up to 46 days post-transplantation. Corneas were also observed histologically. Results: The presence of a grafted corneal endothelium promoted graft rejection; 92.9% (13/14) of grafts were rejected in MLK after an average of 8.3 days, while 69.2% (9/13) of grafts were rejected in SLK on average 10.8 days after transplantation. The former’s stromal opacity was significantly greater at all time points after day 14 except for day 21 (p = 0.77) and day 32 (p = 0.25). Corneal edema was significantly greater in the former at all time points after day 10 except for day 21 (p = 0.16). Neovascularization was significantly greater in the former at all time points after day 10 except for day 25 (p = 0.22). Conclusion: Variations of this model of LK may be useful for studies of immunological mechanisms in corneal transplantation. The donor corneal endothelium may serve as a target of the immune response which promotes inflammation, neovascularization, and graft rejection.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Terry MA: The evolution of lamellar grafting techniques over twenty-five years. Cornea 2000;19:611–616.
  2. Huang T, Planck SR, Rosenbaum JT, et al: Feasibility study of lamellar keratoplasty in a murine model. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2009;17:257–264.
  3. Streilein JW: New thoughts on the immunology of corneal transplantation. Eye (Lond) 2003;17:943–948.
  4. Stuart PM, Griffith TS, Usui N, et al: CD95 ligand (FasL)-induced apoptosis is necessary for corneal allograft survival. J Clin Invest 1997;99:396–402.
  5. Yamagami S, Kawashima H, Tsuru T: Role of Fas-Fas ligand interactions in the immunorejection of allogeneic mouse corneal transplants. Transplantation 1997;64:1107–1111.
  6. Lau CH, Nicholls SM, Easty DL: A murine model of interlamellar corneal transplantation. Br J Ophthalmol 1998;82:294–299.
  7. Sohn JH, Kaplan HJ, Suk HJ, et al: Complement regulatory activity of normal human intraocular fluid is mediated by MCP, DAF, and CD59. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:4195–4202.
  8. Taylor AW, Streilein JW, Cousins SW: Identification of alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone as a potential immunosuppressive factor in aqueous humor. Curr Eye Res 1992;11:1199–1206.
  9. Cousins SW, McCabe MM, Danielpour D: Identification of transforming growth factor-beta as an immunosuppressive factor in aqueous humor. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991;32:2201–2211.
  10. Niederkorn JY: The immune privilege of corneal grafts. J Leukoc Biol 2003;74:167–171.
  11. Niederkorn JY: The immunology of corneal transplantation. Dev Ophthalmol 1999;30:129–140.
  12. Niederkorn JY: The immune privilege of corneal allografts. Transplantation 1999;67:1503–1508.
  13. Niederkorn JY: Anterior chamber-associated immune deviation. Chem Immunol 1999;73:59–71.
  14. Niederkorn JY: Immunology and immunomodulation of corneal transplantation. Int Rev Immunol 2002;21:173–196.
  15. Niederkorn, JY, Mayhew E, Mellon J, et al: Role of tumor necrosis factor receptor expression in anterior chamber-associated immune deviation (ACAID) and corneal allograft survival. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:2674–2681.
  16. Sonoda A, Sonoda Y, Muramatu R, et al: ACAID induced by allogeneic corneal tissue promotes subsequent survival of orthotopic corneal grafts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:790–798.
  17. Yao YF, Inoue Y, Miyazaki D, et al: Ocular resurfacing and alloepithelial rejection in a murine keratoepithelioplasty model. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36:2623–2633.
  18. Driebe WT Jr, Park JY, Meisler DM: Epithelial rejection rings. Arch Ophthalmol 1997;115:938–939.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50