Cornea · 2019
Randomized Study of Collagen Cross-Linking With Conventional Versus Accelerated UVA Irradiation Using Riboflavin With Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose: Two-Year Results.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hagem Anne Marie, Thorsrud Andreas, Sandvik Gunhild Falleth, Drolsum Liv
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcome 2 years after corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) with conventional and accelerated ultraviolet A (UVA) irradiation using riboflavin with hydroxypropyl methylcellulose.
METHODS: Prospective randomized controlled study. Forty patients with keratoconus (40 eyes) were randomized to either CXL using conventional 3 mW/cm UVA irradiation for 30 minutes (CXL30 group) or accelerated 9 mW/cm UVA irradiation for 10 minutes (CXL10 group). In both groups, a solution of 0.1% riboflavin with 1.1% hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (methylcellulose-riboflavin) was used. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and Scheimpflug tomography were performed at baseline and after 24 months.
RESULTS: Both groups had statistically significant improvement in CDVA and maximum keratometric reading compared with baseline; however, with no statistically significant difference in the change between the 2 groups. No significant changes in flattest, steepest and mean keratometry (K1, K2 and K mean) were found in either of the groups. There were no statistically significant changes in ECD in either group after 2 years or in the difference in the change between the 2 groups. A literature review showed comparative clinical outcome after accelerated CXL compared with conventional CXL; however, in several studies, there was a tendency for less pronounced corneal flattening after accelerated CXL.
CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in visual acuity and maximum keratometric reading 2 years after CXL was found after both conventional and accelerated UVA irradiation using methylcellulose-riboflavin. This suggests that when using riboflavin with methylcellulose, the less time-consuming accelerated protocol is a valuable and effective option in CXL treatment.
METHODS: Prospective randomized controlled study. Forty patients with keratoconus (40 eyes) were randomized to either CXL using conventional 3 mW/cm UVA irradiation for 30 minutes (CXL30 group) or accelerated 9 mW/cm UVA irradiation for 10 minutes (CXL10 group). In both groups, a solution of 0.1% riboflavin with 1.1% hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (methylcellulose-riboflavin) was used. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and Scheimpflug tomography were performed at baseline and after 24 months.
RESULTS: Both groups had statistically significant improvement in CDVA and maximum keratometric reading compared with baseline; however, with no statistically significant difference in the change between the 2 groups. No significant changes in flattest, steepest and mean keratometry (K1, K2 and K mean) were found in either of the groups. There were no statistically significant changes in ECD in either group after 2 years or in the difference in the change between the 2 groups. A literature review showed comparative clinical outcome after accelerated CXL compared with conventional CXL; however, in several studies, there was a tendency for less pronounced corneal flattening after accelerated CXL.
CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in visual acuity and maximum keratometric reading 2 years after CXL was found after both conventional and accelerated UVA irradiation using methylcellulose-riboflavin. This suggests that when using riboflavin with methylcellulose, the less time-consuming accelerated protocol is a valuable and effective option in CXL treatment.