错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

A comparison of keratoconus progression following collagen cross-linkage using standard or personalised keratometry thresholds

  • Ji-Peng Olivia Li,
  • Howard P. Maile,
  • Catey Bunce,
  • Lynn Kandakji,
  • Marcello T. Leucci,
  • Bruce D. Allan,
  • Stephen J. Tuft,
  • Nikolas Pontikos,
  • Daniel M. Gore

摘要

Objective

To define how estimates of keratoconus progression following collagen cross-linking (CXL) vary according to the parameter selected to measure corneal shape.

Materials and methods

We estimated progression following CXL in 1677 eyes. We compared standard definitions of keratoconus progression based on published thresholds for Kmax, front K2, or back K2, or progression of any two of these three parameters, with the option of an increased threshold for Kmax values ≥ 55D. As corneal thickness reduces unpredictably after CXL, it was excluded from the principal analysis. We then repeated the analysis using novel adaptive estimates of progression for Kmax, front K2, or back K2, developed separately using 6463 paired readings from keratoconus eyes, with a variation of the Bland–Altman method to determine the 95% regression-based limits of agreement (LoA). We created Kaplan-Meier survival plots for both standard and adaptive thresholds. The primary outcome was progression five years after a baseline visit 9–15 months following CXL.

Results

Progression rates were 8% with a standard (≥ 1.5D) threshold for K2 or 6% with the static multi-parameter definition. With a ≥ 1D threshold for Kmax, the progression was significantly higher at 29%. With adaptive Kmax or K2, the progression rates were similar (20%) but less than with the adaptive multi-parameter method (22%).

Conclusions

Estimates of keratoconus progression following CXL vary widely according to the reference criteria. Using adaptive thresholds (LoA) to define the repeatability of keratometry gives estimates for progression that are markedly higher than with the standard multi-parameter method.