Advertisement

International Ophthalmology

, Volume 39, Issue 11, pp 2675–2683 | Cite as

The efficacy of standard versus accelerated epi-off corneal cross-linking protocols: a systematic review and sub-group analysis

  • Mohammad Miraftab
  • Hassan HashemiEmail author
  • Mohammad Abdollahi
  • Shekoufeh Nikfar
  • Soheila Asgari
Review

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the one-year efficacy of accelerated and standard 5.4 J/cm2 protocols of cross-linking (CXL) in the treatment of progressive keratoconus.

Methods

In this systematic review, two members of the research team searched Scopus, Pubmed, ISI, Ovid, Science Direct, and Cochrane databases independently for publications between January 2010 and December 2016. The majority of retrieved studies were not randomized clinical trials (RCT), or the second arm of the RCT was either untreated or customized CXL. The outcomes of interest were uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction spherical equivalent, maximum keratometry in the central 3 mm, minimum keratometry in the central 3 mm, and corneal thickness in the apex or thinnest point at baseline and 1 year after CXL.

Results

Of the 453 papers found in the preliminary search, 23 papers were included in the final analysis. Analysis of variance of one-year changes showed that longer irradiation times were associated with a greater corneal flattening effect, although there was no difference in terms of improvement in vision or refraction.

Conclusions

In other words, efficacy is comparable among different CXL protocols, so it is recommended to use the standard method in cases where maximum flattening is expected, such as young people and severe cases.

Keywords

Standard cross-linking Accelerated cross-linking Systematic review 

Notes

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Krachmer JH, Feder RS, Belin MW (1984) Keratoconus and related noninflammatory corneal thinning disorders. Surv Ophthalmol 28:293–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vazirani J, Basu S (2013) Keratoconus: current perspectives. Clin Ophthalmol 7:2019–2030PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wollensak G, Spoerl E, Seiler T (2003) Riboflavin/ultraviolet-a-induced collagen crosslinking for the treatment of keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol 135:620–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vega-Estrada A, Alio JL, Plaza Puche AB, Marshall J (2012) Outcomes of a new microwave procedure followed by accelerated cross-linking for the treatment of keratoconus: a pilot study. J Refract Surg 28:787–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsatsos M, MacGregor C, Kopsachilis N, Anderson D (2014) Is accelerated corneal collagen cross-linking for keratoconus the way forward? Yes. Eye (Basingstoke) 28:784–785Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mrochen M (2013) Current status of accelerated corneal cross-linking. Indian J Ophthalmol 61:428–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hashemi H, Fotouhi A, Miraftab M, Bahrmandy H, Seyedian MA, Amanzadeh K, Heidarian S, Nikbin H, Asgari S (2015) Short-term comparison of accelerated and standard methods of corneal collagen crosslinking. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:533–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cinar Y, Cingu AK, Turkcu FM, Cinar T, Yuksel H, Ozkurt ZG, Caca I (2014) Comparison of accelerated and conventional corneal collagen cross-linking for progressive keratoconus. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 33:218–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    MacGregor C, Tsatsos M, Hossain P (2014) Is accelerated corneal collagen cross-linking for keratoconus the way forward? No. Eye (Basingstoke) 28:786–787Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aldahlawi NH, Hayes S, O’Brart DP, Meek KM (2015) Standard versus accelerated riboflavin-ultraviolet corneal collagen crosslinking: resistance against enzymatic digestion. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:1989–1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chow VW, Chan TC, Yu M, Wong VW, Jhanji V (2015) One-year outcomes of conventional and accelerated collagen crosslinking in progressive keratoconus. Sci Rep 5:14425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tomita M, Mita M, Huseynova T (2014) Accelerated versus conventional corneal collagen crosslinking. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:1013–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sadoughi MM, Einollahi B, Baradaran-Rafii A, Roshandel D, Hasani H, Nazeri M (2018) Accelerated versus conventional corneal collagen cross-linking in patients with keratoconus: an intrapatient comparative study. Int Ophthalmol 38:67–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wernli J, Schumacher S, Spoerl E, Mrochen M (2013) The efficacy of corneal cross-linking shows a sudden decrease with very high intensity UV light and short treatment time. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54:1176–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hammer A, Richoz O, Arba Mosquera S, Tabibian D, Hoogewoud F, Hafezi F (2014) Corneal biomechanical properties at different corneal cross-linking (CXL) irradiances. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55:2881–2884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crowe M, Sheppard L, Campbell A (2011) Comparison of the effects of using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool versus informal appraisal in assessing health research: a randomised trial. Int J Evid Based Healthc 9:444–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crowe M, Sheppard L, Campbell A (2012) Reliability analysis for a proposed critical appraisal tool demonstrated value for diverse research designs. J Clin Epidemiol 65:375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bozkurt E, Ozgurhan EB, Akcay BIS, Kurt T, Yildirim Y, Gunaydin ZK, Demirok A (2017) Refractive, topographic, and aberrometric results at 2-year follow-up for accelerated corneal cross-link for progressive keratoconus. J Ophthalmol 2017:5714372Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Medeiros CS, Giacomin NT, Bueno RL, Ghanem RC, Moraes HV Jr, Santhiago MR (2016) Accelerated corneal collagen crosslinking: technique, efficacy, safety, and applications. J Cataract Refract Surg 42:1826–1835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mita M, Waring GO, Tomita M (2014) High-irradiance accelerated collagen crosslinking for the treatment of keratoconus: six-month results. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:1032–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Waszczykowska A, Jurowski P (2015) Two-year accelerated corneal cross-linking outcome in patients with progressive keratoconus. Biomed Res Int 2015:325157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grentzelos MA, Kymionis GD (2015) Corneal stromal demarcation line after high-intensity (accelerated) collagen crosslinking. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hashemi H, Asgari S (2016) Mesopic visual quality after accelerated corneal cross linking: a 12-month follow-up study. J Curr Ophthalmol 29:116–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ng AL, Chan TC, Lai JS, Cheng AC (2015) Comparison of the central and peripheral corneal stromal demarcation line depth in conventional versus accelerated collagen cross-linking. Cornea 34:1432–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu Y, Liu Y, Zhang YN, Li AP, Zhang J, Liang QF, Jie Y, Pan ZQ (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing modified cross-linking and standard cross-linking for progressive keratoconus. Int J Ophthalmol 10:1419–1429PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hashemi H, Miraftab M, Seyedian MA, Hafezi F, Bahrmandy H, Heidarian S, Amanzadeh K, Nikbin H, Fotouhi A, Asgari S (2015) Long-term results of an accelerated corneal cross-linking protocol (18 mW/cm2) for the treatment of progressive keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol 160(1164–70):e1Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shetty R, Pahuja NK, Nuijts RM, Ajani A, Jayadev C, Sharma C, Nagaraja H (2015) Current protocols of corneal collagen cross-linking: visual, refractive, and tomographic outcomes. Am J Ophthalmol 160:243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Asgari S, Hashemi H, Mohamadi A, Jafarzadehpur E, Miraftab M, Shahhoseini S, Mehravaran S, Fotouhi A (2018) Scotopic contrast sensitivity and glare after accelerated corneal cross-linking. Clin Exp Optom 101:52–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Asgari S, Hashemi H, Miraftab M, Shahhoseini S, Jafarzadhpur E, Mehravaran S, Fotouhi A (2017) Photopic, mesopic, and scotopic visual acuity after 18 mW/cm2 accelerated corneal cross-linking. Eye Contact Lens 44:S185–S189.  https://doi.org/10.1097/icl.0000000000000377 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koller T, Mrochen M, Seiler T (2009) Complication and failure rates after corneal crosslinking. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1358–1362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McAnena L, Doyle F, O’Keefe M (2017) Cross-linking in children with keratoconus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Ophthalmol 95:229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chunyu T, Xiujun P, Zhengjun F, Sarig T, Shenhav L, Varssano D (2014) Corneal collagen cross-linking in keratoconus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 4:5652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Toprak I, Yaylali V, Yildirim C (2014) Factors affecting outcomes of corneal collagen crosslinking treatment. Eye (Lond) 28:41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hashemi H, Seyedian MA, Miraftab M, Fotouhi A, Asgari S (2013) Corneal collagen cross-linking with riboflavin and ultraviolet a irradiation for keratoconus: long-term results. Ophthalmology 120:1515–1520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ivarsen A, Hjortdal J (2013) Collagen cross-linking for advanced progressive keratoconus. Cornea 32:903–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Asri D, Touboul D, Fournie P, Malet F, Garra C, Gallois A, Malecaze F, Colin J (2011) Corneal collagen crosslinking in progressive keratoconus: multicenter results from the French National Reference Center for Keratoconus. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:2137–2143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hersh PS, Greenstein SA, Fry KL (2011) Corneal collagen crosslinking for keratoconus and corneal ectasia: one-year results. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wittig-Silva C, Chan E, Islam FM, Wu T, Whiting M, Snibson GR (2014) A randomized, controlled trial of corneal collagen cross-linking in progressive keratoconus: three-year results. Ophthalmology 121:812–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Spoerl E, Huhle M, Seiler T (1998) Induction of cross-links in corneal tissue. Exp Eye Res 66:97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Touboul D, Efron N, Smadja D, Praud D, Malet F, Colin J (2012) Corneal confocal microscopy following conventional, transepithelial, and accelerated corneal collagen cross-linking procedures for keratoconus. J Refract Surg 28:769–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bouheraoua N, Jouve L, El Sanharawi M, Sandali O, Temstet C, Loriaut P, Basli E, Borderie V, Laroche L (2014) Optical coherence tomography and confocal microscopy following three different protocols of corneal collagen-crosslinking in keratoconus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55:7601–7609CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Miraftab
    • 1
  • Hassan Hashemi
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mohammad Abdollahi
    • 3
  • Shekoufeh Nikfar
    • 4
    • 5
  • Soheila Asgari
    • 1
  1. 1.Noor Ophthalmology Research CenterNoor Eye HospitalTehranIran
  2. 2.Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic EpidemiologyNoor Eye HospitalTehranIran
  3. 3.The Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (TIPS), Faculty of PharmacyTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of PharmacyTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  5. 5.The Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (TIPS)Tehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran

Personalised recommendations