Observational studyEuropean journal of ophthalmology2024
The HUC progression score: A new method for determining KERATOCONUS progression.
Observational study in European journal of ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Keratoconus progression assessment].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Repeated Corneal Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus After Failure of Primary Procedure; Safety and Efficacy at 12-Month Follow-Up.Ophthalmology and therapy · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo establish new criteria for the progression of keratoconus, taking into account a Pentacam HR (high resolution) tomographeŕs repeatability limit.
methodsThis is a retrospective observational study, including 224 eyes in 154 patients diagnosed with keratoconus and patients treated with crosslinking, with a follow-up of at least one year, in which the new progression score of the Cruces University Hospital for keratoconus progression was analyzed. This score takes into account: maximum keratometry, thinnest corneal thickness, maximum posterior elevation, vertical coma and RMS of high order aberrations, all based on the tomographer repeatability limit. The effectiveness or not of crosslinking was determined.
resultsThe Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves obtained in our validation met the criteria by being far from the reference diagonal. Moreover, young patients are more likely to have keratoconus that progresses, and the percentage of patients that showed progression was 14.3% of the eyes studied, with the most advanced keratoconus showing the least progression. Taking into account the new progression score of the Cruces Hospital, we would have indicated crosslinking in 2 eyes only and we observed that none progressed one year after treatment.
conclusionsThe the new progression score of the Cruces University Hospital is a method based on the real repeatability limit for keratoconic eyes. Moreover, it is easy to interpret and can be implemented with Pentacam software. It provides a numerical value that evaluates both the anterior and posterior surfaces of the cornea and corneal aberrations in the evolution of keratoconus.
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.