Literature DB >> 28283279

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Transepithelial Corneal Cross-linking Using Iontophoresis with the Dresden Protocol in Progressive Keratoconus.

Marco Lombardo1, Daniela Giannini2, Giuseppe Lombardo3, Sebastiano Serrao2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes of transepithelial corneal cross-linking using iontophoresis (T-ionto CL) and standard corneal cross-linking (standard CL) for the treatment of progressive keratoconus 12 months after the operation.
DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-four eyes of 25 participants with progressive keratoconus were randomized into T-ionto CL (22 eyes) or standard CL (12 eyes).
METHODS: T-ionto CL was performed using an iontophoresis device with dextran-free 0.1% riboflavin-5-phosphate solution with enhancers and by irradiating the cornea with a 10 mW/cm2 ultraviolet A device for 9 minutes. Standard CL was performed according to the Dresden protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was stabilization of keratoconus after 12 months through analysis of maximum simulated keratometry readings (Kmax, diopters). Other outcome measures were corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]), manifest spherical equivalent refraction (D), central corneal thickness (CCT, micrometers) and endothelial cell density (ECD). Follow-up examinations were arranged at 3 and 7 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months.
RESULTS: Twelve months after T-ionto CL and standard CL, Kmax on average flattened by -0.52±1.30 D (P = 0.06) and -0.82±1.20 D (P = 0.04), respectively. The mean change in CDVA was -0.10±0.12 logMAR (P = 0.003) and -0.03±0.06 logMAR (P = 0.10) after T-ionto CL and standard CL, respectively. The manifest spherical equivalent refraction changed on average by +0.71±1.44 D (P = 0.03) and +0.21±0.76 D (P = 0.38), respectively. The CCT and ECD measures did not change significantly in any group at 12 months. Significant differences in the outcome measures between treatments were found in the first week postoperatively. No complications occurred in the T-ionto CL group; 1 eye (8%) had sterile corneal infiltrates, which did not affect the final visual acuity, in the standard CL group.
CONCLUSIONS: Significant visual and refractive improvements were found 12 months after T-ionto CL, though the average improvement in corneal topography readings was slightly lower than the Dresden protocol in the same period.
Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28283279     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.01.040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  15 in total

Review 1.  New perspectives in keratoconus treatment: an update on iontophoresis-assisted corneal collagen crosslinking.

Authors:  Paolo Vinciguerra; Alessio Montericcio; Fiammetta Catania; Giovanni Fossati; Raffaele Raimondi; Emanuela Filomena Legrottaglie; Riccardo Vinciguerra
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Comparison of corneal biological parameters between transepithelial and epithelium-off corneal cross-linking in keratoconus.

Authors:  Bo-Wen Ouyang; Hui Ding; Han Wang; Zhen-Duo Yang; Tan Zhong; Hong-Ming Fan; Xing-Wu Zhong
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 1.779

Review 3.  Current perspectives on corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL).

Authors:  Sandeepani K Subasinghe; Kelechi C Ogbuehi; George J Dias
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 4.  Efficacy of iontophoresis-assisted epithelium-on corneal cross-linking for keratoconus.

Authors:  Hong-Zhen Jia; Xiu-Jun Peng
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Benefits of using corneal topography to choose subjective refraction technique in keratoconus (RE-CON): a prospective comparative crossover clinical study.

Authors:  Margaux Metzger; Valentin Navel; Jean-Vincent Barrière; Fabrice Kwiatkowski; Jérémy Hébraud; Aurélien Mulliez; Laurence Béral; Frédéric Chiambaretta; Frédéric Dutheil
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-08-20       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Comparison between standard and transepithelial corneal crosslinking using a theranostic UV-A device.

Authors:  Giuseppe Lombardo; Sebastiano Serrao; Marco Lombardo
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Comparison of modified corneal cross-linking with intrastromal voriconazole for the treatment of fungal corneal ulcer.

Authors:  Yingxin Chen; Xingya Miao; Minghong Gao; Lixin Song
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  Transepithelial versus epithelium-off corneal crosslinking for progressive keratoconus.

Authors:  Sueko M Ng; Mark Ren; Kristina B Lindsley; Barbara S Hawkins; Irene C Kuo
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-03-23

Review 9.  Keratoconus Treatment Algorithm.

Authors:  Konstantinos D Andreanos; Kate Hashemi; Myrsini Petrelli; Konstantinos Droutsas; Ilias Georgalas; George D Kymionis
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2017-07-28

10.  Transepithelial Versus Epithelium-Off Corneal Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus: Findings From a Cochrane Systematic Review.

Authors:  Sueko M Ng; Barbara S Hawkins; Irene C Kuo
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 5.488

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.