COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Accelerated versus conventional corneal collagen crosslinking.

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of accelerated corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) and conventional corneal CXL.

SETTINGS: Private practice, Tokyo, Japan.

DESIGN: Comparative study.

METHODS: Eyes with keratoconus had accelerated CXL (KXL system; 15 minutes riboflavin [Vibex Rapid] presoak; 3 minutes 30 mW/cm(2) ultraviolet-A [UVA] light) or conventional CXL (CCL-365 Vario system; 30 minutes riboflavin [Vibex] presoak; 30 minutes 3 mW/cm(2) UVA light). The postoperative changes in visual acuity, keratometry readings, morphologic changes in the cornea, demarcation line existence, and corneal biomechanical responses with accelerated CXL and conventional CXL were compared. The follow-up was 1 year.

RESULTS: The study enrolled 48 eyes of 39 patients; 30 eyes had accelerated CXL, and 18 eyes had conventional CXL. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative changes in uncorrected or corrected distance visual acuity or in the manifest refraction spherical equivalent between the 2 procedures. There were also no statistically significant differences in the postoperative changes in the keratometric readings from the Pentacam Scheimpflug device or the corneal biomechanical responses from a dynamic bidirectional applanation device (Ocular Response Analyzer) or a dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer (Corvis ST) between the procedures. Similar morphologic changes and a pronounced demarcation line were apparent in eyes in both groups postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS: Accelerated CXL and conventional CXL were both safe and effective. Accelerated CXL, being a fast procedure, appears to be more beneficial for patients and surgeons.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app