ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2024
Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity after Corneal Cross-Linking in Keratoconus?
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06522789 (Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity After Corneal Cross-linking in Keratoconus?), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity After Corneal Cross-linking in Keratoconus?
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionObjective markers describing corneal optical density (COD), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), and anterior (ARC) and posterior (PRC) surface radii over the 3 mm thinnest region of the cornea were investigated to provide a model for estimating corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) after corneal cross-linking (CXL) in keratoconus.
methodsCDVA, COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC were monitored (using Pentacam™) over 1 year in patients with (1) keratoconus treated with routine CXL (2) relatively stable untreated keratoconus, and (3) age/gender-matched controls.
resultsIn group 1 (n = 77), the median logMAR CDVA (mode, interquartile range) improved significantly (p < 0.01) from 0.26 (0.22, 0.12-0.65) to 0.07 (0.00, 0.02-0.21). The mean (± standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) COD (in 0-100 grey scale units) in the 0-2 mm central anterior corneal region (0-2 ant), TCT (µm), ARC (mm), and PRC (mm) changed significantly (p < 0.01), from 21.2 (± 3.70, 20.4-22.0), 454 (± 40.0, 446-462), 6.49 (± 0.71, 6.33-6.65), and 4.81 (± 0.65, 4.66-4.96) to 31.5 (± 9.19, 29.5-33.6), 423 (± 49.3, 412-434), 6.78 (± 0.80, 6.60-6.98), and 4.74 (± 0.64, 4.59-4.88), respectively, but remained stable in groups 2 (n = 23) and 3 (n = 24). Significant relationships (p < 0.01) were uncovered between postop CDVA and preop values of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC. Multilinear regression revealed significant correlations between CDVA at 1 year and preop COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC (r
conclusionCXL improved CDVA, increased COD and ARC, and reduced TCT and PRC. The chance of correctly estimating the CDVA at 1 year after CXL using preoperative markers of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC is 53%, improving to 64% with the inclusion of preoperative CDVA. Objective measurements taken at the preoperative screening stage may be useful to estimate the likely postoperative CDVA when preoperative CDVA measures are unreliable or unobtainable.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06522789.
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.