ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2023
Corneal cross-linking in patients with keratoconus: up to 13 years of follow-up.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-based progress prediction in accelerated cross-linking for Keratoconus.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Influence of Crosslinking on Astigmatism Vector in Keratoconus: A Vector Analysis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Keratometry Changes Between Year Seven and Twelve After Corneal Crosslinking in Patients with Keratoconus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Long-term Effects and Prognostic Factors of Accelerated Cross-Linking with Retention Ring-assisted Riboflavin Application on Keratoconus Progression.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in patients with keratoconus up to 13 years. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this mono-centre exploratory study, we included all consecutive patients who underwent CXL in our cornea centre from 01/01/2007 to 12/30/2011 and met the inclusion criteria. CXL was performed in all patients according to the Dresden protocol. Evaluation included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), topographic keratometry by Scheimpflug corneal tomography and endothelial cell count (ECC). Follow-up measurements were taken up to 13 years after treatment were compared with baseline values.
resultsThe study enrolled 168 eyes. The mean age of our patients was 26.3 years ± 7.8 years. A complete topographic dataset was available 1 year postoperatively for 142 eyes, 5 years postoperatively for 105 eyes, 10 years postoperatively for 61 eyes and 13 years postoperatively for 9 eyes. BCVA increased statistically significant after 1 year, 5 years and 10 years and non-significantly after 13 years. All keratometric parameters with exception of posterior astigmatism showed a statistically significant decrease after 1 year, 5 years and 10 years. After 13 years, the decrease was statistically significant only in Kmax, K2 and thinnest cornea. No significant changes in ECC were detected. Three eyes received Re-CXL, none of the eyes received penetrating keratoplasty and no infections occurred in this cohort.
conclusionsCXL can slow down or even stop the progression of keratoconus in the majority of cases. The effect is long-lasting with excellent safety.
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.