All of us Vs Keratoconus

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

Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 76
Date: Sat Apr 11 4:07 PM, 2020
Crossinking for Children with Keratoconus

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



Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Date: Sat Apr 11 4:10 PM, 2020

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


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


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.


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.


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.]

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to

Knowledge Works