systematic review and meta-analysis comparing modified cross-linking and standard cross-linking for progressive keratoconus
Clicks: 191
ID: 181292
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
191 views
22 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #58 of 79 articles by views in The Classical Review
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
AIM: To compare the effectiveness and safety between modified cross-linking (MC) and standard cross-linking (SC) in mild or moderate progressive keratoconus.
METHODS: Eligible studies were retrieved from four electronic databases, including CENTRAL, Clinical Trials gov, PupMed and OVID MEDLINE. We set post-surgical maximum K value (Kmax) as the primary outcome. In addition, uncorrected and corrected distant visual acuity (UDVA and UDVA), spherical equivalent (SE), endothelial cell density (ECD), central cornea thickness (CCT) and depth of demarcation line (DDL) were Meta-analyzed as secondary outcomes. Mean differences for these outcomes were pooled through either a random-effect model or fixed-effect model according to data heterogeneity.
RESULTS: Twenty-four comparative studies either on accelerated cross-linking (AC) compared with SC or on trans-epithelial cross-linking (TC) compared with SC were included and pooled for analysis. The results indicated that MC was significantly inferior to SC at delaying Kmax deterioration [AC vs SC 0.49 (95% CI: 0.04-0.94, I2=75%, P=0.03); TC vs SC 1.15 (95% CI: 0.54-1.75, I2=50%, P=0.0002)]. SE decreased significantly for SC when compared to AC [0.62 (95% CI: 0.38-0.86, I2=22%, P<0.00001)]. DDL of SC was more significantly deeper than that of TC [-133.49 (95% CI: -145.94 to -121.04, I2=33%, P<0.00001)]. Other outcomes demonstrated comparable results between MC and SC.
CONCLUSION: SC is more favorable at halting the progression of keratoconus, but visual acuity improvement showed comparable results between MCs and SC.
| Reference Key |
liu2017internationalsystematic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Yang Liu;Yi Liu;Ying-Nan Zhang;Ai-Peng Li;Jing Zhang;Qing-Feng Liang;Ying Jie;Zhi-Qiang Pan |
| Journal | The Classical Review |
| Year | 2017 |
| DOI |
10.18240/ijo.2017.09.15
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.