Cone location and correction of keratoconus with rigid gas-permeable contact lenses

Nejabat, Mahmood; Khalili, Mohammad Reza; Dehghani, Cirous

doi:10.1016/j.clae.2011.08.007

Cited by 27 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These indicated the central cone group had more effectiveness for the CXL treatment. Unlike RGP, [14] Greenstein et al [15] also found that for both keratoconus and ectasia, more topographic flattening occurs in eyes with centrally located cones than the eyes with cone located paracentrally and peripherally after CXL.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of corneal crosslinking for central and paracentral keratoconus

Tian

Weiyan

et al. 2017

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The aim of the study was to compare the therapy of corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) for central and paracentral keratoconus.Methods:64 eyes of 43 central keratoconus patients whose highest power of the cornea located in the central 3 mm zone and 24 eyes of 16 paracentral keratoconus patients whose highest power located out of the central 3 mm zone received standard corneal CXL were included. Maximum keratometry (Kmax) and astigmatism according to topography, uncorrected distant visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA) were studied preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively.Results:Central group: Preoperative UDVA and CDVA were 0.9 ± 0.4 and 0.5 ± 0.4 logMAR, respectively. At 2 years, UDVA and CDVA significantly improved to 0.8 ± 0.4 and 0.4 ± 0.3 logMAR(P < 0.01). Preoperative Kmax and astigmatism were 61.5 ± 14.7 diopter (D) and 4.0 ± 2.9 D, respectively. At 2 years, Kmax and astigmatism significantly decreased to 57.0 ± 10.4 and 3.0 ± 2.2 D (P < 0.01). Paracentral group: preoperative UDVA and CDVA were 0.8 ± 0.7 and 0.2 ± 0.4 logMAR, respectively. At 2 years, UDVA significantly improved to 0.4 ± 0.4 logMAR(P < 0.01), whereas CDVA remained 0.2 ± 0.3 logMAR(P > 0.05). Preoperative Kmax and astigmatism were 50.3 ± 5.3 and 2.4 ± 1.7 D, respectively. At 2 years, Kmax significantly decreased to 48.8 ± 4.6 (P < 0.01), whereas astigmatism remained 2.2 ± 1.8 D (P > 0.05).Conclusion:This study indicated that CXL was more effective for central keratoconus than paracentral keratoconus.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of corneal crosslinking for central and paracentral keratoconus

Tian

Weiyan

et al. 2017

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent study has shown that eccentricity of the keratoconus cone (and hence the maximum keratometry) may have no role in outcomes with contact lens fitting; however, another study showed that it may have implications in surgical interventions such as collagen cross-linking. 11,12 We found that maximum keratometry (MaxK) was governed differently in normal, suspect and keratoconic eyes. It corroborated very well with central 3 mm keratometry in normal cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive Analysis Between Topographic, Pachymetric and Wavefront Parameters in Keratoconus, Suspects and Normal Eyes: Creating Unified Equations to Evaluate Keratoconus

Prakash¹,

Suhail²,

Srivastava³

2015

Current Eye Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ultimately contact lens fitting in keratoconus becomes a complex procedure that necessitates longer chair time and multiple diagnostic fitting trials. There are reports on the selection of contact lens base curve based on corneal topography indices [9][10][11][12][13]22] and mostly the parameter selection is based on clinician's experience. The FITSCAN RGP fitting software utilises the anterior elevation data that represents the actual representation of the anterior corneal surface, to produce the fluorescein maps and hence thought to be a better tool in the selection of the contact lens parameters in keratoconus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A trial lens (diagnostic) fitting approach is often necessary to achieve an acceptable contact lens fit in keratoconus patients and often multiple trials are required [6,7]. The corneal topography is an important tool in the management of keratoconus and it guide in the parameter selection of the initial trial lens [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%