Literature DB >> 33892046

Effect of Corneal Cross-linking versus Standard Care on Keratoconus Progression in Young Patients: The KERALINK Randomized Controlled Trial.

Daniel F P Larkin1, Kashfia Chowdhury2, Jennifer M Burr3, Mathew Raynor4, Matthew Edwards4, Stephen J Tuft5, Catey Bunce5, Emilia Caverly2, Caroline Doré2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine the efficacy and safety of corneal cross-linking (CXL) for stabilization of progressive keratoconus.
DESIGN: Observer-masked, randomized, controlled, parallel-group superiority trial. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty participants 10 to 16 years of age with progressive keratoconus, one eye of each deemed the study eye.
METHODS: The study eye was randomized to either CXL plus standard care or standard care alone, with spectacle or contact lens correction as necessary for vision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was steep keratometry (K2) in the study eye as a measure of the steepness of the cornea at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included keratoconus progression defined as a 1.5-diopter (D) increase in K2, visual acuity, keratoconus apex corneal thickness, and quality of life.
RESULTS: Of 60 participants, 30 were randomized to CXL and standard care groups. Of these, 30 patients in the CXL group and 28 patients in the standard care group were analyzed. Mean K2 in the study eye 18 months after randomization was 49.7 D (standard deviation [SD], 3.8 D) in the CXL group and 53.4 D (SD, 5.8 D) in the standard care group. The adjusted mean difference in K2 in the study eye was -3.0 D (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.9 to -1.1 D; P = 0.002), favoring CXL. Adjusted differences between groups in uncorrected and corrected vision favored eyes receiving CXL: -0.31 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR; 95% CI, -0.50 to -0.11 logMAR; P = 0.002) and -0.51 logMAR (95% CI, -1.37 to 0.35 logMAR; P = 0.002). Keratoconus progression in the study eye occurred in 2 patients (7%) randomized to CXL compared with 12 patients (43%) randomized to standard care. The unadjusted odds ratio suggests that on average, patients in the CXL arm had 90% (odds ratio, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.02-0.48; P = 0.004) lower odds of experiencing progression compared with those receiving standard care.
CONCLUSIONS: CXL arrests progression of keratoconus in the majority of young patients. CXL should be considered as a first-line treatment in progressive disease. If the arrest of keratoconus progression induced by CXL is sustained in longer follow-up, particular benefit may be derived from avoiding a later requirement for contact lens wear or corneal transplantation.
Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cornea; Cornea cross-linking; Keratoconus

Year:  2021        PMID: 33892046     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.04.019

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


  5 in total

1.  Corneal cross-linking in patients with keratoconus: up to 13 years of follow-up.

Authors:  Christian Enders; Diana Vogel; Jens Dreyhaupt; Waltraud Wolf; Aylin Garip-Kuebler; Jonathan Hall; Lukas Neuhann; Jens Ulrich Werner
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-10-05       Impact factor: 3.535

2.  Impact of rigid gas-permeable contact lens on keratometric indices and corneal thickness of keratoconus eyes examined with anterior segment optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Kaho Akiyama; Takashi Ono; Hitoha Ishii; Lily Wei Chen; Kohdai Kitamoto; Tetsuya Toyono; Junko Yoshida; Makoto Aihara; Takashi Miyai
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Does progression in keratoconus have to be witnessed by the hospital eye service for it to have occurred?

Authors:  David Lockington; Alasdair Simpson; Kerr Brogan; Kanna Ramaesh
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 4.456

4.  Crosslinking vs. Observation in Fellow Eyes of Keratoconus Patients.

Authors:  Gavin Li; Laura Di Meglio; Jiangxia Wang; Fasika A Woreta; Kraig S Bower; Vishal Jhanji; Divya Srikumaran; Uri S Soiberman
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 1.974

Review 5.  Machine Learning Algorithms to Detect Subclinical Keratoconus: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Howard Maile; Ji-Peng Olivia Li; Daniel Gore; Marcello Leucci; Padraig Mulholland; Scott Hau; Anita Szabo; Ismail Moghul; Konstantinos Balaskas; Kaoru Fujinami; Pirro Hysi; Alice Davidson; Petra Liskova; Alison Hardcastle; Stephen Tuft; Nikolas Pontikos
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2021-12-13
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.