Cited by 219Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsRetinal Development and DisordersRetinal and Macular Surgery

Long-term outcome of RPE allografts in non-immunosuppressed patients with AMD

Algvere, P. V., Gouras, P., Dafgård Kopp, E.·1999·European Journal of Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the long-term outcome of human retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) transplants in patients with advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods: Using pars plana microsurgical techniques, RPE allografts were transplanted subretinally to four groups of AMD patients: five patients received organized patch transplants after removal of choroidal neovascular membranes, four got small patch transplants in dry AMD; suspensions of RPE cells were transplanted in five cases with dry AMD, and two patients with RPE tears. None received immunosuppression. Transplants were followed for 24–38 months by biomicroscopy, fundus photography, SLO microperimetry, and fluorescein angiography. Rejection was defined as loss of visual function over the transplant, development of an exudative response (subretinal fluid with or without neovascularization), fluorescein leakage, and disruption, depigmentation, or encapsulation of the transplant. Results: Four of 16 transplants (25%) presented no clinical signs of rejection. Three of the four small patch transplants remained pigmented and essentially unchanged after 30–32 months. Clinical signs of graft rejection appeared within three months in all cases of neovascular AMD (disrupted blood-retinal barrier, BRB), but after 6 - 20 months in five of nine eyes with non-exudative AMD (intact BRB). Conclusions: Subretinal human RPE allografts present a high rejection rate (75%) without immunosuppression. However, small extrafoveal transplants remained unchanged in shape, size and color for more than two years in non-exudative AMD. A disrupted BRB is likely to enhance graft rejection, which occurs earlier in exudative than in non-exudative AMD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/112067219900900310

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Algvere, P. V., Gouras, P., & Dafgård Kopp, E.
Affiliations
  • Linköping University (SE)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Department of Ophthalmology, Karolinska Institute, St. Erik's Eye Hospital, Stockholm - Sweden
Venue
European Journal of Ophthalmology
Published
1999-07
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
217-230
ISSN
  • 1120-6721 (ISSN-L)
  • 1724-6016
OpenAlex
W1480779622
Cited by
219
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal and Macular Surgery
Keywords
age-related macular degeneration, graft rejection, non-immunocompromised patient, subretinal transplantation, choroidal neovascularization, dry age-related macular degeneration, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Female, Fluorescein Angiography, Graft Rejection, Humans, Immunosuppression Therapy, Macular Degeneration, Male, Middle Aged, Pigment Epithelium of Eye, Pregnancy, Ophthalmologic Surgical Procedures, Time Factors, Transplantation, Homologous, Vitrectomy, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review