Abstract

Corneal transplantation stands alone as the most common and successful form of solid organ transplantation. Even though HLA matching and systemic antirejection drugs are not routinely used, 90% of the first time corneal allografts will succeed. By contrast, all other major categories of organ transplantation require HLA matching and the use of systemically administered immunosuppressive drugs. This remarkable success of corneal transplants under these conditions is an example of "immune privilege" and is the primary reason for the extraordinary success of corneal transplantation. A number of dogmas have emerged over the past century to explain immune privilege and the immunobiology of corneal transplantation. Many of these dogmas have been based largely on inferences from clinical observations on keratoplasty patients. The past 30 years have witnessed a wealth of rodent studies on corneal transplantation that have tested hypotheses and dogmas that originated from clinical observations on penetrating keratoplasty patients. Rodent models allow the application of highly sophisticated genetic and immunological tools for testing these hypotheses in a controlled environment and with experiments designed prospectively. These studies have validated some of the widely held assumptions based on clinical observations and in other cases, previous dogmas have been replaced with new insights that could only come from prospective studies performed under highly controlled conditions. This review highlights some of the key dogmas and these widely held assumptions that have been scrutinized through the use of rodent models of penetrating keratoplasty. This review also makes note of new immunological principles of corneal immunology that have emerged from rodent studies on corneal transplantation that most likely would not have been revealed in studies on corneal transplantation patients.

Highlights

  • The notion that grafting corneal tissue to blind eyes might restore vision was proposed over 200 years ago by Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin

  • The landmark studies by Billingham and Medawar demonstrated that the eye and the anterior chamber of the eye in particular possessed remarkable properties that allowed the prolonged and sometimes permanent survival of corneal allografts placed onto the ocular surface or skin allografts placed into the anterior chamber of the eye [4, 5]

  • One of the time-honored tenets of corneal transplantation immunology is that the presence of blood vessels in the graft bed is a harbinger of corneal graft rejection

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The notion that grafting corneal tissue to blind eyes might restore vision was proposed over 200 years ago by Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. The first reported case of corneal transplantation in a human subject occurred in 1838 when Kissam transplanted a pig cornea onto a human patient without the use of anesthesia [1]. 1905 witnessed the first successful corneal graft transplanted from a human donor to a human recipient [2]. Since this landmark accomplishment hundreds of thousands corneal transplants have been successfully performed in humans. Medawar recognized the profound implications of these observations and coined the term “immune privilege” to emphasize the unique properties of the ocular surface and the anterior chamber of the eye [5]

Immune Privilege of Corneal Allografts
Using Animal Models to Define Immune Privilege of Corneal Allografts
Blood Vessels and Immune Privilege of Corneal Allografts
Atopy as a Risk Factor for Corneal Allograft Rejection
The Self Defense Strategy of Corneal Allografts
Findings
Why do Second Corneal Transplants have such a Poor Acceptance Rate?

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.