Cargando…

Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)

PURPOSE: Corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) is an effective treatment for progressive keratoconus. Multiple CXL modalities are clinically available. The present study compared the 1 year outcomes of five types of CXL procedures for progressive keratoconus in a Chinese population using generalized e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Yu, Shen, Dan, Wang, Hao-yu, Liang, Deng-feng, Zeng, Qing-yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36627585
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02744-w
_version_ 1784867741813964800
author Liu, Yu
Shen, Dan
Wang, Hao-yu
Liang, Deng-feng
Zeng, Qing-yan
author_facet Liu, Yu
Shen, Dan
Wang, Hao-yu
Liang, Deng-feng
Zeng, Qing-yan
author_sort Liu, Yu
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) is an effective treatment for progressive keratoconus. Multiple CXL modalities are clinically available. The present study compared the 1 year outcomes of five types of CXL procedures for progressive keratoconus in a Chinese population using generalized estimating equations (GEE). METHODS: This retrospective study included 239 eyes in 171 patients with keratoconus who underwent CXL and were followed up for 1 year. Five CXL procedures were assessed, including Accelerated Transepithelial CXL, Iontophoresis CXL for 10 min, CXL plus phototherapeutic keratectomy (CXL-plus-PTK), High-Fluence Accelerated CXL, and Accelerated CXL. Patients treated with the Accelerated CXL procedure represented the reference group. Primary outcomes were visual acuity change, spherical equivalence, endothelial cell density, mean keratometry (K(mean)), maximum keratometry (K(max)), minimum corneal thickness (MCT), and the ABCD Grading System, consisting of A (staging index for ARC; ARC = anterior radius of curvature), B (staging index for PRC, PRC = posterior radius of curvature), and C (staging index for MCT) values 1 year postoperatively compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes were corrected GEE comparisons from each procedure versus the Accelerated CXL group. RESULTS: The Accelerated Transepithelial CXL group had lower performance than the Accelerated CXL group according to K(mean) and K(max). The CXL-plus-PTK group performed significantly better than the reference group as reflected by K(max) (β = -0.935, P = 0.03). However, the CXL-plus-PTK group did not perform as well for B and C, and the Iontophoresis CXL group performed better for C. CONCLUSIONS: The CXL-plus-PTK procedure was more effective than the Accelerated CXL procedure based on K(max), and the Iontophoresis CXL procedure performed better on the C value based on the ABCD Grading System. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12886-022-02744-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9830808
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98308082023-01-11 Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) Liu, Yu Shen, Dan Wang, Hao-yu Liang, Deng-feng Zeng, Qing-yan BMC Ophthalmol Research PURPOSE: Corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) is an effective treatment for progressive keratoconus. Multiple CXL modalities are clinically available. The present study compared the 1 year outcomes of five types of CXL procedures for progressive keratoconus in a Chinese population using generalized estimating equations (GEE). METHODS: This retrospective study included 239 eyes in 171 patients with keratoconus who underwent CXL and were followed up for 1 year. Five CXL procedures were assessed, including Accelerated Transepithelial CXL, Iontophoresis CXL for 10 min, CXL plus phototherapeutic keratectomy (CXL-plus-PTK), High-Fluence Accelerated CXL, and Accelerated CXL. Patients treated with the Accelerated CXL procedure represented the reference group. Primary outcomes were visual acuity change, spherical equivalence, endothelial cell density, mean keratometry (K(mean)), maximum keratometry (K(max)), minimum corneal thickness (MCT), and the ABCD Grading System, consisting of A (staging index for ARC; ARC = anterior radius of curvature), B (staging index for PRC, PRC = posterior radius of curvature), and C (staging index for MCT) values 1 year postoperatively compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes were corrected GEE comparisons from each procedure versus the Accelerated CXL group. RESULTS: The Accelerated Transepithelial CXL group had lower performance than the Accelerated CXL group according to K(mean) and K(max). The CXL-plus-PTK group performed significantly better than the reference group as reflected by K(max) (β = -0.935, P = 0.03). However, the CXL-plus-PTK group did not perform as well for B and C, and the Iontophoresis CXL group performed better for C. CONCLUSIONS: The CXL-plus-PTK procedure was more effective than the Accelerated CXL procedure based on K(max), and the Iontophoresis CXL procedure performed better on the C value based on the ABCD Grading System. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12886-022-02744-w. BioMed Central 2023-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9830808/ /pubmed/36627585 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02744-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Liu, Yu
Shen, Dan
Wang, Hao-yu
Liang, Deng-feng
Zeng, Qing-yan
Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title_full Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title_fullStr Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title_full_unstemmed Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title_short Independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for Progressive Keratoconus based on Keratometry and the ABCD Grading System using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE)
title_sort independent-effect comparison of five crosslinking procedures for progressive keratoconus based on keratometry and the abcd grading system using generalized estimating equations (gee)
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36627585
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02744-w
work_keys_str_mv AT liuyu independenteffectcomparisonoffivecrosslinkingproceduresforprogressivekeratoconusbasedonkeratometryandtheabcdgradingsystemusinggeneralizedestimatingequationsgee
AT shendan independenteffectcomparisonoffivecrosslinkingproceduresforprogressivekeratoconusbasedonkeratometryandtheabcdgradingsystemusinggeneralizedestimatingequationsgee
AT wanghaoyu independenteffectcomparisonoffivecrosslinkingproceduresforprogressivekeratoconusbasedonkeratometryandtheabcdgradingsystemusinggeneralizedestimatingequationsgee
AT liangdengfeng independenteffectcomparisonoffivecrosslinkingproceduresforprogressivekeratoconusbasedonkeratometryandtheabcdgradingsystemusinggeneralizedestimatingequationsgee
AT zengqingyan independenteffectcomparisonoffivecrosslinkingproceduresforprogressivekeratoconusbasedonkeratometryandtheabcdgradingsystemusinggeneralizedestimatingequationsgee