Yang Liu1, Yi Liu1, Ying-Nan Zhang1, Ai-Peng Li2, Jing Zhang1, Qing-Feng Liang3, Ying Jie1, Zhi-Qiang Pan1. 1. Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100005, China. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun 130021, Jilin Province, China. 3. Beijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University; Beijing Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, Beijing 100005, China.
Abstract
AIM: To compare the effectiveness and safety between modified cross-linking (MC) and standard cross-linking (SC) in mild or moderate progressive keratoconus. METHODS: Eligible studies were retrieved from four electronic databases, including CENTRAL, Clinical Trials gov, PupMed and OVID MEDLINE. We set post-surgical maximum K value (Kmax) as the primary outcome. In addition, uncorrected and corrected distant visual acuity (UDVA and UDVA), spherical equivalent (SE), endothelial cell density (ECD), central cornea thickness (CCT) and depth of demarcation line (DDL) were Meta-analyzed as secondary outcomes. Mean differences for these outcomes were pooled through either a random-effect model or fixed-effect model according to data heterogeneity. RESULTS: Twenty-four comparative studies either on accelerated cross-linking (AC) compared with SC or on trans-epithelial cross-linking (TC) compared with SC were included and pooled for analysis. The results indicated that MC was significantly inferior to SC at delaying Kmax deterioration [AC vs SC 0.49 (95% CI: 0.04-0.94, I2=75%, P=0.03); TC vs SC 1.15 (95% CI: 0.54-1.75, I2=50%, P=0.0002)]. SE decreased significantly for SC when compared to AC [0.62 (95% CI: 0.38-0.86, I2=22%, P<0.00001)]. DDL of SC was more significantly deeper than that of TC [-133.49 (95% CI: -145.94 to -121.04, I2=33%, P<0.00001)]. Other outcomes demonstrated comparable results between MC and SC. CONCLUSION: SC is more favorable at halting the progression of keratoconus, but visual acuity improvement showed comparable results between MCs and SC.
AIM: To compare the effectiveness and safety between modified cross-linking (MC) and standard cross-linking (SC) in mild or moderate progressive keratoconus. METHODS: Eligible studies were retrieved from four electronic databases, including CENTRAL, Clinical Trials gov, PupMed and OVID MEDLINE. We set post-surgical maximum K value (Kmax) as the primary outcome. In addition, uncorrected and corrected distant visual acuity (UDVA and UDVA), spherical equivalent (SE), endothelial cell density (ECD), central cornea thickness (CCT) and depth of demarcation line (DDL) were Meta-analyzed as secondary outcomes. Mean differences for these outcomes were pooled through either a random-effect model or fixed-effect model according to data heterogeneity. RESULTS: Twenty-four comparative studies either on accelerated cross-linking (AC) compared with SC or on trans-epithelial cross-linking (TC) compared with SC were included and pooled for analysis. The results indicated that MC was significantly inferior to SC at delaying Kmax deterioration [AC vs SC 0.49 (95% CI: 0.04-0.94, I2=75%, P=0.03); TC vs SC 1.15 (95% CI: 0.54-1.75, I2=50%, P=0.0002)]. SE decreased significantly for SC when compared to AC [0.62 (95% CI: 0.38-0.86, I2=22%, P<0.00001)]. DDL of SC was more significantly deeper than that of TC [-133.49 (95% CI: -145.94 to -121.04, I2=33%, P<0.00001)]. Other outcomes demonstrated comparable results between MC and SC. CONCLUSION: SC is more favorable at halting the progression of keratoconus, but visual acuity improvement showed comparable results between MCs and SC.
Authors: George D Kymionis; Konstantinos I Tsoulnaras; Dimitrios A Liakopoulos; Christina A Skatharoudi; Michael A Grentzelos; Nikolaos G Tsakalis Journal: J Refract Surg Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Sally Hayes; David P O'Brart; Letitia S Lamdin; James Doutch; Kostas Samaras; John Marshall; Keith M Meek Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Hany A Khairy; Moataz F Elsawy; Khaled Said-Ahmed; Marwa A Zaki; Sameh S Mandour Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: F Cifariello; M Minicucci; F Di Renzo; D Di Taranto; G Coclite; S Zaccaria; S De Turris; C Costagliola Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-07-29 Impact factor: 1.909
Authors: Emilie Sophie van der Valk Bouman; Heather Pump; David Borsook; Boris Severinsky; Robert Pl Wisse; Hajirah N Saeed; Eric A Moulton Journal: BMJ Open Ophthalmol Date: 2021-11-29