Oman journal of ophthalmology · 2015
Trans-epithelial versus conventional corneal collagen crosslinking: A randomized trial in keratoconus.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nawaz Shah, Gupta Shikha, Gogia Varun, Sasikala N K, Panda Anita
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose was to compare transepithelial versus epithelium off technique of corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) in patients of keratoconus.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: Totally, 40 eyes (40 patients) with progressive keratoconus were subjected to transepithelial CXL (20 eyes; Group I), and conventional CXL (20 eyes; Group II). Patients were evaluated for uncorrected distance visual acuity, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), slit lamp-biomicroscopy, keratometry, 9-point pachymentry, orbscan II, and endothelial cell count at baseline and post CXL at 1, 3, and 6 months.
RESULTS: The two groups were similar with respect to the evaluated parameters both at baseline and at the end of 6 months. There was an improvement in mean BCVA from Log Mar 0.327 ± 0.1 (Group 1), 0.36 ± 0.08 (Group 2) to 0.23 ± 0.08 (Group 1; P < 0.001), 0.22 ± 0.06 (Group 2; P < 0.001), respectively, at 6 months. Mean Sim K astigmatism decreased from 6.6 ± 1.93 D (Group 1), 6.64 ± 1.93 D (Group 2) to 5.14 ± 1.86 D (Group 1; P = 0.001), and 4.77 ± 0.06 (Group 2; P = 0.001), respectively, at 6 months. The mean pachymetry increased from 432.05 ± 19.36 μm (Group 1), 429.91 ± 16.66 μm (Group 2) to 447.8 ± 16.09 μm (Group 1; P < 0.001), 440.25 ± 11.18 um (Group 2; P = 0.002), respectively, at 6 months. All cases showed stabilization of keratoconus two eyes in epithelium off group developed persistent stromal haze. Most of the patients in Group II experienced pain and photophobia during first 2 days, but not of Group I.
CONCLUSION: Trans-epithelial technique offers visual and topographic outcomes similar to the conventional method with superior patient comfort postintervention.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: Totally, 40 eyes (40 patients) with progressive keratoconus were subjected to transepithelial CXL (20 eyes; Group I), and conventional CXL (20 eyes; Group II). Patients were evaluated for uncorrected distance visual acuity, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), slit lamp-biomicroscopy, keratometry, 9-point pachymentry, orbscan II, and endothelial cell count at baseline and post CXL at 1, 3, and 6 months.
RESULTS: The two groups were similar with respect to the evaluated parameters both at baseline and at the end of 6 months. There was an improvement in mean BCVA from Log Mar 0.327 ± 0.1 (Group 1), 0.36 ± 0.08 (Group 2) to 0.23 ± 0.08 (Group 1; P < 0.001), 0.22 ± 0.06 (Group 2; P < 0.001), respectively, at 6 months. Mean Sim K astigmatism decreased from 6.6 ± 1.93 D (Group 1), 6.64 ± 1.93 D (Group 2) to 5.14 ± 1.86 D (Group 1; P = 0.001), and 4.77 ± 0.06 (Group 2; P = 0.001), respectively, at 6 months. The mean pachymetry increased from 432.05 ± 19.36 μm (Group 1), 429.91 ± 16.66 μm (Group 2) to 447.8 ± 16.09 μm (Group 1; P < 0.001), 440.25 ± 11.18 um (Group 2; P = 0.002), respectively, at 6 months. All cases showed stabilization of keratoconus two eyes in epithelium off group developed persistent stromal haze. Most of the patients in Group II experienced pain and photophobia during first 2 days, but not of Group I.
CONCLUSION: Trans-epithelial technique offers visual and topographic outcomes similar to the conventional method with superior patient comfort postintervention.