Outcome indicators for cross linking in pediatric keratoconus

5Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the predictive factors for successful corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in pediatric patients with Keratoconus (KC). Methods: This retrospective study was conducted using a prospectively built database. Patients (18 years old or younger) underwent CXL for KC between 2007 and 2017, with a 1-year follow-up period or longer. The outcomes included changes in Kmax (delta [Δ] Kmax = Kmaxlast − Kmaxpre) and LogMAR visual acuity (ΔLogMAR = LogMARlast − LogMARpre). The effects of CXL type (accelerated or non-accelerated), demographics (age, sex, background of ocular allergy, ethnicity), preoperative LogMAR visual acuity, maximal corneal power (Kmax), pachymetry (CCTpre), refractive cylinder, and follow-up (FU) time on the outcomes were analyzed. Results: One hundred thirty-one eyes of 110 children were included (mean age, 16 ± 2 years; range, 10–18 years). Kmax and LogMAR improved from baseline to last visit: from 53.81 D ± 6.39 D to 52.31 D ± 6.06 D (p < 0.001) and from 0.27 ± 0.23 LogMAR units to 0.23 ± 0.19 LogMAR units (p = 0.005), respectively. A negative ΔKmax (meaning corneal flattening) was associated with a long FU, low CCTpre, high Kmaxpre, high LogMARpre, and non-accelerated CXL on univariate analysis. High Kmaxpre and non-accelerated CXL were associated with negative ΔKmax in the multivariate analysis. A negative ΔLogMAR (meaning vision improvement) was associated with a high LogMARpre in univariate analysis. Conclusion: CXL is an effective treatment option in pediatric patients with KC. Our results showed that the non-accelerated treatment was more effective than the accelerated treatment. Corneas with advanced disease had a greater effect on CXL.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wajnsztajn, D., Shmueli, O., Tarnovsky, Y., Frucht-Pery, J., & Solomon, A. (2023). Outcome indicators for cross linking in pediatric keratoconus. Frontiers in Medicine, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1149641

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free