Trial reportInternational ophthalmology2019
The effects of collagen cross-linking on corneal density: a comparison between accelerated and conventional methods.
Trial report in International ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of corneal pachymetry evolution after accelerated corneal crosslinking in keratoconus eyes using anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug imaging.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity after Corneal Cross-Linking in Keratoconus?Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- The Impact of Standard Cross-Linking on the Corneal Optical Density-Age Relationship in Keratoconus After Mechanical Stripping of the Epithelium.Journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Corneal optical density: Structural basis, measurements, influencing factors, and roles in refractive surgery.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Factors influencing haze formation and corneal flattening, and the impact of haze on visual acuity after conventional collagen cross-linking: a 12-month retrospective study.BMC ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Demarcation Line after Epithelium-Off Iontophoresis Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking for Progressive Keratoconus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Accelerated Epithelium-Off Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking For Keratoconus: 12-Month Results.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the corneal density before and after accelerated versus conventional corneal cross-linking (CXL).
methodsPentacam densitometry and corneal mapping were performed before and 6 months following the randomly assigned intervention. Corneal density was measured over different zones and layers of the cornea by two independent ophthalmologists. Total corneal density was calculated. The patients were followed up for the occurrence of procedure-related and unrelated complication 1 week, 1 month and a final visit around 6 months (180 ± 10 days) after the procedure, during which the corneal density was remeasured and recorded.
resultsTwenty-three patients were enrolled. There was a significant increase in corneal density over the anterior layer (P < 0.001) and middle corneal layer (P = 0.035). Additionally, the corneal density significantly increased in 0-2 and 2-6 mm zones (P < 0.001), as well as total density (P = 0.002) following corneal CXL. Although there was no significant difference in the corneal density between the two CXL groups, the increase in corneal density was only significant in group A for the 6-10 mm zone and the posterior corneal layer.
conclusionBoth the conventional and accelerated CXL methods increase the overall corneal density with exception of posterior central corneal layer and the 6-10 mm zone, which is only increased in the accelerated method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29931571What 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.