ArticleMedicine2017
Outcomes of iontophoretic corneal collagen crosslinking in keratoconic eyes with very thin corneas.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accelerated CXL Versus Accelerated Contact-Lens Assisted CXL Treatment for Progressive Keratoconus-A 3-Year Retrospective Comparative Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Two-year outcomes of accelerated contact lens-assisted corneal crosslinking versus accelerated corneal crosslinking: a comparative study.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- The impact of interrupted corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) treatment.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
- Pediatric Crosslinking: Current Protocols and Approach.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Review
- Long-term visual, refractive, tomographic and aberrometric outcomes of corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) with or without hypoosmolar riboflavin solution in the treatment of progressive keratoconus patients with thin corneas.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022Article
- New perspectives in keratoconus treatment: an update on iontophoresis-assisted corneal collagen crosslinking.International ophthalmology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this retrospective study was to report the results of iontophoretic corneal collagen crosslinking (I-CXL) with riboflavin and ultraviolet A irradiation in patients affected by keratoconus, each with thinnest pachymetry values of <400 μ (with epithelium) and not treatable using standard epithelium-off technique.Fifteen eyes of 15 patients affected by progressive keratoconus and with thinnest pachymetry values <400 μ underwent I-CXL. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, maximum and minimum keratometry (K max and K min) readings, corneal thickness at the thinnest point (CTTP), endothelial cell density (ECD), and intraocular pressure (IOP) were assessed before I-CXL, at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.The mean UDVA and CDVA significantly increased 12 months after I-CXL (P = .002 for both comparisons). The K max readings significantly decreased at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (P = .04 and P = .02, respectively). The mean CTTP improved at the end of the follow-up (P = .008). ECD was unchanged. No side effects or damage to the limbal region was observed during the follow-up period.I-CXL has been proved to be effective in halting keratoconus progression in eyes with very thin corneas, with no side effects during the follow-up period. This procedure could be used in patients with more advanced keratoconus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.