Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 9, 2026

Corneal Donor Tissue Preparation for Endothelial Keratoplasty
Published on: June 12, 2012
Current Practice Patterns for Endothelial Keratoplasty: A Survey of Corneal Surgeons
Ae Ra Kee1,2, Dana Barequet1, Marcela Huertas-Bello1
1Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Purpose:
To investigate current practice patterns among corneal specialists performing Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).
Methods:
An online questionnaire was distributed via the Canadian Ophthalmological Society and Kera-net (Cornea Society listserv) for the period from March to May 2025. The survey collected data on demographics, clinical practice, and intra/postoperative management strategies related to DSAEK and DMEK, including use of perioperative assistive techniques, tamponade strategies, postoperative positioning, and follow-up protocols.
Results:
There were 70 respondents. All performed DSAEK while 82.9% performed DMEK. Most had over 5-year experience with DSAEK (85.7%) and DMEK (77.6%). Donor tissue marking was common (82.5% for DMEK; 72.9% for DSAEK), as were peripheral iridotomy/iridectomy (70.2% for DMEK; 37.1% for DSAEK), and intra/postoperative dilation (45.6% for DMEK; 61.4% for DSAEK). Intraoperative anterior segment optical coherence tomography was used by 15.8% (DMEK) and 12.9% (DSAEK) of respondents. Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas is the preferred tamponade agent for routine DMEK (55.2%) but less so for DSAEK (7.1%). Intraoperative tamponade was more frequent in DSAEK (90.0%) than DMEK (67.2%). Full/near-full air/gas fills were left in 42.9% of routine DSAEK and 50.0% of DMEK. Same-day postoperative review was performed by 74.1% (DMEK) and 67.2% (DSAEK). Many surgeons discharged routine cases from corneal services by postoperative year 1 (53.4% for DMEK; 51.4% for DSAEK).
Conclusions:
This study sheds insights into the current endothelial keratoplasty practices among corneal specialists. Further research is needed to examine how these technique variations correlate with clinical outcomes.

