ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Corneal Collagen Crosslinking for Ectasia After Refractive Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and Risk Factors for Keratoconus in Young Adults Assessed with Tomography and Corneal Biomechanics: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Unilateral Corneal Ectasia After Bilateral Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Phaco-Chop versus Divide-and-Conquer in Patients Who Underwent Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in Refractive Surgery: An Overview.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Corneal ectasia leads to progressive irregular corneal curvature and reduced visual acuity. Objective: To assess the safety and effectiveness of corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) for managing corneal ectasia resulting from refractive laser surgery (RSL). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were realized according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for studies on CXL in patients with ectasia after RLS. The outcomes of interest included visual acuity, refractive outcomes, topographic parameters (Kmax, index surface variance (ISV), index of Vertical Asymmetry (IVA), keratoconus index (KI), central keratoconus index (CKI), index of height asymmetry (IHA), index of height decentration (IHD) and Rmin (minimum sagittal curvature)), central corneal thickness, endothelial cell count, and possible adverse events. Statistical analysis was performed using the R software (version 4.2.3, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Results: 15 studies encompassing 421 patients (512 eyes) were included. The mean age was 32.03 ± 4.4 years. The pooled results showed a stable uncorrected visual acuity post-CXL, with a significant improvement in corrected distance visual acuity (SMD = 0.09; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.26). The spherical equivalent decreased significantly (SMD = -0.09; 95% CI: -0.35, -0.02). The topographic parameter Kmax decreased significantly (SMD = 0.15; 95% CI:0.01 to 0.28); however, the other parameters, ISV, IVA, KI, CKI, IHA, IHD, and Rmin, did not change significantly. Central corneal thickness decreased significantly (SMD = 0.24; 95% CI:0.07 to 0.41), and the endothelial cell count remained stable The complications were rare. Conclusion: CXL is a safe and effective technique for managing corneal ectasia after RLS.
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.