ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025
Predicting the Effects of Customized Corneal Cross-Linking on Corneal Geometry.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Precise Epithelium Removal for Ectatic Corneas Technique in Corneal Collagen Crosslinking (PERFECT-CXL): Technique Description and Clinical Outcomes.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To validate an existing finite element model (FEM) for predicting the flattening effect of corneal cross-linking (CXL) in a clinical scenario and to use this model to investigate the parameters that most influence CXL-induced flattening effects. Methods: Retrospective data were collected from two clinical cohorts, each with 20 patients receiving either standard or customized CXL. Data were collected before surgery and at the six-month follow-up. Both CXL treatments were simulated with a FEM calibrated on experimental data. Standard anterior corneal geometry indexes (e.g., sphere, cylinder), as well as the curvature changes observed at follow-up were compared to those predicted by FEM simulations. Results: At follow-up, patients who underwent customized CXL exhibited more corneal flattening compared to those who received standard CXL (Kmax-t: -2.28 ± 1.4 D vs. -0.81 ± 1.5 D; P < 0.001). The FEM-predicted curvature reduction in the central CXL regions showed a significant correlation with the follow-up data for both standard (R2 = 0.48, P < 0.01) and customized CXL (R2 = 0.59, P < 0.01). Compared to follow-up data, standard CXL model showed concordance correlation coefficients > 0.9 for nine corneal geometry parameters and customized CXL model for three. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that a 3 mm Hg increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) combined with a 10% weaker keratoconus region alters flattening outcomes by up to 20%. Conclusions: Customized CXL induces a flattening of about 2 diopters in the cone region six months after surgery. The model adequately captured the curvature corrections induced by the treatment in the keratoconus cone region, but showed reduced accuracy in predicting global corneal metrics, particularly for customized CXL. The induced flattening effects depend on the IOP, keratoconus-induced biomechanical weakening, and the fluence delivered to the cone.
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.