| Literature DB >> 25874118 |
Joelle Antoun1, Elise Slim2, Rami El Hachem2, Elias Chelala2, Elyse Jabbour2, Georges Cherfan3, Elias F Jarade4.
Abstract
Objective. To report the rate of progression of keratectasia after primary crosslinking (CXL) and evaluate the safety and efficiency of CXL redo. Materials and Methods. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the patients who underwent CXL between 2010 and 2013 at the Beirut Eye Specialist Hospital, Lebanon. Progression of keratectasia was based on the presence of an increase in maximum keratometry of 1.00 D, a change in the map difference between two consecutive topographies of 1.00 D, a deterioration of visual acuity, or any change in the refraction. Primary and redo CXL were done using the same protocol. Results. Among the 221 eyes of 130 patients who underwent CXL, 7 eyes (3.17%) of five patients met the criteria of progression. All patients reported a history of allergic conjunctivitis and eye rubbing and progressed within 9 to 48 months. No complications were noted and all patients were stable 1 year after CXL redo. Conclusion. Allergic conjunctivitis and eye rubbing were the only risk factors associated with keratoconus progression after CXL. A close followup is thus mandatory, even years after the procedure. CXL redo seems to be a safe and efficient technique to halt the progression after a primary CXL.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25874118 PMCID: PMC4383466 DOI: 10.1155/2015/690961
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ophthalmol ISSN: 2090-004X Impact factor: 1.909
Baseline patient characteristics of 221 eyes of 130 patients who underwent CXL between March 2010 and March 2013 at our private clinic. PRK: photorefractive keratectomy; ICRS: intrastromal corneal ring segments; n%: number (percentage).
| Characteristics | Value |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Male ( | 68 (52%) |
| Female ( | 62 (48%) |
| Age, years | |
| 16–30 | 95 (73.1%) |
| 30–50 | 35 (26.9%) |
| Stage of KC (Amsler-Krumeich) | |
| Stage 1 ( | 96 (43%) |
| Stage 2 ( | 100 (45%) |
| Stage 3 ( | 25 (12%) |
|
| |
| Keratometry, diopters | |
| Flattest meridian | |
| 40–44 | 132 (60%) |
| 44–46 | 89 (40%) |
| Steepest meridian | |
| 45–58 | 122 (55%) |
| 58–68 | 99 (45%) |
| Maximal keratometry | |
| 48–58 | 103 (47%) |
| 58–68 | 118 (53%) |
|
| |
| Pachymetry, microns | |
| 400–450 | 156 (70%) |
| 450–580 | 65 (30%) |
| Associated surgeries | 70 (32%) |
| ICRS | 50 (23%) |
| PRK | 20 (9%) |
Patient characteristics: all eyes had allergic conjunctivitis. ∗: missing data. CCT: central corneal thickness; PRK: photorefractive keratectomy; ICRS: intrastromal corneal ring segments; LASIK: laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis.
| Eye | Age | Gender | Diagnosis | Stage of Kc. | Baseline CCT |
| Associated surgeries | Time (months) since first CXL | Slit lamp evaluation (first visit) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eye 1 | 27 | F | Keratoconus | Stage 2 | 489 | Yes | PRK | 14 | No haze papillae |
| Eye 2 | 19 | F | Keratoconus | Stage 2 | 523 | Yes | ICRS | 38 | No haze papillae |
| Eye 3 | 30 | M | Post-LASIK ectasia | 420 | Yes | ICRS | 9 | No haze papillae | |
| Eye 4 | 26 | M | Keratoconus | Stage 4 | 414 | Yes | None | 23 | Striae papillae |
| Eye 5 | 26 | M | Keratoconus | Stage 4 | 418 | Yes | None | 24 | Striae + haze papillae |
| Eye 6 | 28 | M | Keratoconus | Stage 2 | ∗ | Yes | ICRS | 48 | No haze papillae |
| Eye 7 | 28 | M | Keratoconus | Stage 2 | ∗ | Yes | ICRS | 48 | No haze papillae |
Figure 1A map difference showing progression after primary corneal collagen crosslinking. B represents corneal topography 6 months after primary CXL, and A shows corneal topography 12 months after primary CXL. The map difference (difference A-B) shows the progression after initial CXL with +2.5 and +3.4 D of difference between successive topographies (white circle).
Progression of keratometric readings. K readings remained stable one year after CXL redo. ∗: missing data. #: difference.
| Eye | Preoperatively | 6 months after CXL | At diagnosis of progression |
| One year after CXL redo | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Eye 1 | 40.6 | 50.2 | 53.9 | 41.2 | 45.5 | 50.7 | 42.1 | 46.2 | 51.3 |
| 42.00 | 45.8 | 51.00 |
| Eye 2 | 45.2 | 48.9 | 51.3 | 42.93 | 45.45 | ∗ | 43.15 | 46.67 | ∗ |
| 43.00 | 46.87 | ∗ |
| Eye 3 | 53.53 | 60.25 | 67.5 | 40.84 | 41.16 | 45.22 | 40.5 | 43.38 | 49.97 |
| 40.00 | 43.25 | 49.80 |
| Eye 4 | 51.6 | 55.1 | 57.1 | 52.7 | 54.38 | ∗ | 53.2 | 55.06 | ∗ |
| 52.98 | 54.9 | ∗ |
| Eye 5 | 54.5 | 56.8 | 63.2 | 48.3 | 51.4 | ∗ | 57.05 | 59.33 | ∗ |
| 56.8 | 59.2 | ∗ |
| Eye 6 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 44.07 | 47.45 | 59.4 | 44.49 | 47.5 | 62.11 |
| 44.3 | 46.9 | 61.89 |
| Eye 7 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 47.69 | 50.05 | 59.51 | 47.74 | 49.71 | 61.7 |
| 47.8 | 49.59 | 61.2 |
Change in error of refraction (EOR), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) from baseline to one year after CXL redo. UDVA and CDVA remained stable one year after CXL redo. ∗: missing data; S: sphere; C: cylinder; A: axis.
| Eye | EOR | UDVA/ | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline |
6 mo CXL + associated | Refraction at progression | |||||||||||||||
| S | C | A | S′ | C′ | A′ | S′′ | C′′ | A′′ | Baseline | 6 months after | Time of progression |
1 year after | |||||
| Eye 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 6 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
|
|
|
|
|
| ∗ | ∗ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Eye 7 | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ |
|
|
|
|
|
| ∗ | ∗ |
|
|
|
|
|
|