Cargando…
A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of implanting a single Keraring segment according to a novel Q‐value‐based nomogram (QN) to that of segment implantation according to the manufacturer's standard nomogram (SN), for keratoconus treatment. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled tri...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8359282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32930519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14611 |
_version_ | 1783737513864593408 |
---|---|
author | Iqbal, Mohammed Elmassry, Ahmed Mounir, Amr Ibrahim, Ola Soliman, Ashraf |
author_facet | Iqbal, Mohammed Elmassry, Ahmed Mounir, Amr Ibrahim, Ola Soliman, Ashraf |
author_sort | Iqbal, Mohammed |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of implanting a single Keraring segment according to a novel Q‐value‐based nomogram (QN) to that of segment implantation according to the manufacturer's standard nomogram (SN), for keratoconus treatment. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial of 104 patients (104 eyes) with Amsler‐Krumeich grade 1 or 2 keratoconus, and type 1 or 2 cone asymmetry determined according to manufacturer's classification. They were randomly distributed into two groups: group A patients (n = 52) underwent Keraring implantation according to the SN, and group B patients (n = 52) underwent implantation of a single (210° arc‐length) Keraring segment according to the QN. Both treatments were combined with accelerated transepithelial cross‐linking, and follow‐up was 6 months. Main outcome measures were preoperative and postoperative visual acuity, subjective refraction and corneal topography. RESULTS: At postoperative month 6, group B exhibited statistically significantly higher values of mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), sphere, K2, K‐average, K‐max and Q‐anterior (p = 0.02, 0.01, 0.002, 0.001, 0.0001 and 0.03, respectively) compared to that of group A. However, group A exhibited better refractive cylindrical improvements (p = 0.04). In group A, we documented spontaneous extrusion of one Keraring segment. CONCLUSION: Single 210° arc‐length segment implantation using our objective QN was more efficacious for keratoconus treatment than using the subjective SN. The nomograms were comparable when the Q‐anterior value was >−1.00; however, the QN was superior to the SN when the Q‐anterior value was ≤−1.00. The QN yielded greater postoperative UDVA and smoother corneal remodelling than did the SN for treatment of grade 1 and 2 keratoconic eyes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8359282 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83592822021-08-17 A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial Iqbal, Mohammed Elmassry, Ahmed Mounir, Amr Ibrahim, Ola Soliman, Ashraf Acta Ophthalmol Original Articles PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of implanting a single Keraring segment according to a novel Q‐value‐based nomogram (QN) to that of segment implantation according to the manufacturer's standard nomogram (SN), for keratoconus treatment. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial of 104 patients (104 eyes) with Amsler‐Krumeich grade 1 or 2 keratoconus, and type 1 or 2 cone asymmetry determined according to manufacturer's classification. They were randomly distributed into two groups: group A patients (n = 52) underwent Keraring implantation according to the SN, and group B patients (n = 52) underwent implantation of a single (210° arc‐length) Keraring segment according to the QN. Both treatments were combined with accelerated transepithelial cross‐linking, and follow‐up was 6 months. Main outcome measures were preoperative and postoperative visual acuity, subjective refraction and corneal topography. RESULTS: At postoperative month 6, group B exhibited statistically significantly higher values of mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), sphere, K2, K‐average, K‐max and Q‐anterior (p = 0.02, 0.01, 0.002, 0.001, 0.0001 and 0.03, respectively) compared to that of group A. However, group A exhibited better refractive cylindrical improvements (p = 0.04). In group A, we documented spontaneous extrusion of one Keraring segment. CONCLUSION: Single 210° arc‐length segment implantation using our objective QN was more efficacious for keratoconus treatment than using the subjective SN. The nomograms were comparable when the Q‐anterior value was >−1.00; however, the QN was superior to the SN when the Q‐anterior value was ≤−1.00. The QN yielded greater postoperative UDVA and smoother corneal remodelling than did the SN for treatment of grade 1 and 2 keratoconic eyes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-09-15 2021-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8359282/ /pubmed/32930519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14611 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Iqbal, Mohammed Elmassry, Ahmed Mounir, Amr Ibrahim, Ola Soliman, Ashraf A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title | A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full | A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title_short | A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | novel q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8359282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32930519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14611 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT iqbalmohammed anovelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT elmassryahmed anovelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT mouniramr anovelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT ibrahimola anovelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT solimanashraf anovelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT iqbalmohammed novelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT elmassryahmed novelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT mouniramr novelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT ibrahimola novelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT solimanashraf novelqvaluebasednomogramforsingleintracornealringsegmentimplantationversusstandardmanufacturersnomogramcombinedwithacceleratedcrosslinkingfortreatmentofkeratoconusarandomizedcontrolledtrial |