All of us Vs Keratoconus


Members Login
Chatbox
Please log in to join the chat!
Post Info TOPIC: Crossinking for Children with Keratoconus


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 80
Date: Sat Apr 11 4:07 PM, 2020
Crossinking for Children with Keratoconus
Permalink   
 


Whats the comparative difference between conventional V accelerated Crosslinking for children with Keratoconus?



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Date: Sat Apr 11 4:10 PM, 2020
Permalink   
 

This below study was published in the Journal of Refractive Surgery

Efficacy of Conventional Versus Accelerated Corneal Cross-linking in Pediatric Keratoconus: Two-Year Outcomes

Semra Akkaya Turhan, MD; Berru Yargi, MD; Ebru Toker, MD

PURPOSE:

To compare the efficacy and safety of accelerated corneal cross-linking (CXL) with conventional CXL in pediatric patients with keratoconus.

METHODS:

Consecutive patients with keratoconus received either accelerated CXL (9 mW/cm2 irradiance for 10 minutes) or conventional CXL (3 mW/cm2 irradiance) for 30 minutes. Visual acuities (uncorrected [UDVA] and corrected [CDVA] distance visual acuity, logMAR), spherical error, cylindrical error, spherical equivalent, and keratometric values were recorded. Follow-up measurements were compared with baseline values.

RESULTS:

The study enrolled 48 eyes: 22 eyes had accelerated CXL (mean age: 16.0 1.7 years) and 26 eyes had conventional CXL (mean age: 15.7 1.6 years). Compared with preoperative values, all mean keratometric values significantly improved in the accelerated CXL group (flat [K1]: = 0.64 D, P < .0001, steep [K2]: = 0.63 D, P = .009 and Kmax: = 0.55 D, P = .028), but no significant changes were observed in the mean UDVA and CDVA. In the conventional CXL group, all mean keratometric values and CDVA significantly improved (K1: = 0.65 D, P = .017, K2: = 0.87 D, P = .006, Kmax: = 1.47 D, P = .011). No significant changes were observed in refractive error in either CXL group. There were no significant differences in the keratometric readings, visual acuities, or refractive error between the two groups at the 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both conventional and accelerated CXL protocols appear to be effective in stabilizing keratoconus progression in pediatric patients. Improved CDVA was also observed in the conventional CXL group. Accelerated CXL, with its advantage of shorter treatment duration, may be an alternative in pediatric patients.

[J Refract Surg. 2020;36(4):265269.]



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Date: Fri Jun 12 8:00 AM, 2020
Permalink   
 

Soroosh Behshad, MD, MPH, of the Emory Eye Center, speaks about the key takeaways from the presentation on, "Corneal crosslinking outcomes in children with progressive keratoconus," during the 2020 ASCRS virtual meeting. Click Here(scroll down to access the topic and the adjacent topics covered as well)



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 16
Date: Sat Jun 13 1:04 PM, 2020
Permalink   
 

This on incorrect sleeping position and eye rubbing in patients with unilateral or highly asymmetric keratoconus: a case-control study is something which parents may want to read at the earliest (KC or no KC, CXL or No CXL yet).



__________________
We are all patients or will be (!) So put patients first!
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us

www.kcfreedom.org

Knowledge Works