ArticleActa ophthalmologica2019
Standard cross-linking versus photorefractive keratectomy combined with accelerated cross-linking for keratoconus management: a comparative study.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel Q-value-based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross-linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial.Acta ophthalmologica · 2021Trial
- Review
- Delayed corneal haze after combined photorefractive keratectomy and corneal cross-linking in non-keratoconus patients.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Thyroid gland dysfunction and keratoconus.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2024Article
- Review
- Intraocular pressure after combined photorefractive keratectomy and corneal collagen cross-linking for keratoconus.International ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Three-years outcomes of simultaneous photorefractive surgery and customized corneal cross-linking for keratoconus.International ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Comparison of corneal measurements in normal and keratoconus eyes using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography (AS-OCT) and Pentacam HR topographer.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Observational
- Outcomes of the Q value-based nomogram in managing pediatric versus adult keratoconus: a prospective interventional study.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2023Article
- Management of keratoconus: an updated review.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of combined staged surgical treatment in patients with keratoconus.PloS one · 2022Article
- Corneal cross-linking (CXL) combined with refractive surgery for the comprehensive management of keratoconus: CXL plus.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2020Review
- Combined Protocols for Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking with Photorefractive Surgery for Refractive Management of Keratoconus: Update on Techniques and Review of Literature.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2019Review
- Visual and Refractive Long-Term Outcomes Following Standard Cross-Linking in Progressive Keratoconus Management.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019Article
- Combined photorefractive keratectomy and corneal collagen cross-linking for treatment of keratoconus: a 2-year follow-up study.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
- Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of keratoconus.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the safety and efficacy of standard 30 min epithelium-off cross-linking (CXL) versus photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) combined with accelerated epithelium-off cross-linking (AXL) for the treatment of progressive keratoconus (CXL-Plus).
methodsThis study was a prospective multicentre comparative clinical study. A total of 125 eyes of 75 patients with grade 1 keratoconus and documented progression were divided into two groups. Group A included 58 eyes treated with standard CXL. Group B included 67 eyes treated with combined PRK and AXL. The recorded data included UDVA, CDVA, subjective and objective refraction, keratometry and pachymetry using corneal topographies preoperatively and postoperatively at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months of follow-up.
resultsIn group A, at 24 months of UDVA and CDVA were improved from 1.12 ± 0.38 and 0.58 ± 0.42 to 0.66 ± 0.20 and 0.20 ± 0.12 (LogMAR±SD). The spherical equivalent was reduced from 4.03 ± 1.18 to 1.78 ± 1.04 D. The cylinder reduction was 0.32 ± 0.19 D. In group B, at 24 months of UDVA and CDVA were improved from 1.26 ± 0.52 and 0.68 ± 0.36 to 0.58 ± 0.28 and 0.20 ± 0.16 (LogMAR ± SD). The spherical equivalent was reduced from 4.23 ± 0.95 to 1.92 ± 0.74 D. The cylinder reduction was ±1.76 D.
conclusionSurprisingly, standard CXL showed close results to CXL-Plus at the 24th follow-up month. Standard CXL acted as a stabilizing procedure associated with a late myopic component reduction. CXL-Plus acted as a refractive and stabilizing procedure with an early effect on both the myopic and the astigmatic component but no later improvements. Standard CXL seems to be more powerful than AXL in its long-term effect. Therefore, in the future, we want to test the combination of PRK with standard CXL.
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.