ArticlePloS one2020
Baseline factors predicting the need for corneal crosslinking in patients with keratoconus.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Superiority of Baseline Biomechanical Properties over Corneal Tomography in Predicting Keratoconus ProgressionTurkish journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Predicting Keratoconus Progression and Need for Corneal Crosslinking Using Deep Learning.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Keratoconus: exploring fundamentals and future perspectives - a comprehensive systematic review.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe primary purpose of crosslinking is to halt the progression of ectasia. We retrospectively assessed the condition of keratoconus patients who were followed-up at least twice after the initial examination to evaluate keratoconus progression, to identify definitive factors to predict a later need for corneal crosslinking (CXL).
methodsThe medical charts of 158 eyes of 158 keratoconus patients (112 males and 46 females; mean age, 27.8 ± 11.7 years), who were followed up at the Department of Ophthalmology, Keio University School of Medicine at least twice after the initial examination to evaluate keratoconus progression were retrospectively reviewed. Best-spectacle corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, steepest corneal axis on the anterior float (Ks), thinnest corneal thickness according to Pentacam® HR, and corneal endothelial cell density were assessed. Gender, age, onset age of keratoconus, history of atopic dermatitis, and Pentacam® indices were also recorded. CXL was performed when the eye showed significant keratoconus progression, an increase in the steepest keratometric value, or an increase in the spherical equivalent or cylinder power of the manifest refraction by more than 1.0 D versus the respective values 2 years prior. Predictor variables and the requirement for CXL were analyzed using logistic regression.
resultsFifty-eight eyes required CXL treatment. The best predictor of the requirement for CXL was patient age, followed by the Pentacam® Rmin (the minimum sagittal curvature evaluated by Pentacam®) value. The incidence of CXL was 86.4% in the < 20 years age group, with an Rmin of ≤ 5.73 mm, whereas 10.8% in the ≥ 27 years age group with an Rmin > 5.73 mm underwent treatment.
conclusionsAn age of < 20 years and an Rmin value of ≤ 5.73 mm predicted keratoconus progression and the requirement for CXL treatment in the near future.
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.