2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.02.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transepithelial Versus Epithelium-off Corneal Cross-linking for the Treatment of Progressive Keratoconus: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

9
141
0
4

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 167 publications
(158 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
9
141
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…6,[25][26][27][28] Twelve-month results from one recently published randomized controlled trial 6 concluded that transepithelial CXL using Ricrolin TE (Sooft Italia S.p.A.) was not effective at stabilizing corneal shape compared with epithelium-off treatment. For iontophoresis, up to 15-month followup data have been published, with reported cessation of disease progression and improvements in keratometric and visual parameters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…6,[25][26][27][28] Twelve-month results from one recently published randomized controlled trial 6 concluded that transepithelial CXL using Ricrolin TE (Sooft Italia S.p.A.) was not effective at stabilizing corneal shape compared with epithelium-off treatment. For iontophoresis, up to 15-month followup data have been published, with reported cessation of disease progression and improvements in keratometric and visual parameters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the only published randomized controlled trial of this newer technique 6 recently concluded that it was not effective compared with epithelium-off CXL. Most commercially available riboflavin formulations for transepithelial CXL are designed to enhance epithelial permeability by the addition of epithelial-toxic agents (Table).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, as for other transepithelial protocols, iontophoresis does not seem to ensure an improvement in topographic indices in pediatric patients 33 . This absence of efficacy can be explained by limited riboflavin and UVA penetration with the epithelium in situ 11,[34][35][36] . Indeed, the epithelium is a physical barrier for both riboflavin and UVA penetration, limiting the depth of apoptosis and thus of corneal biomechanical effects 11 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The original dextran-containing solutions have been shown in both laboratory and clinical studies to be ineffective for transepithelial cross-linking. [9][10][11][12] A number of formulations of riboflavin designed to facilitate penetration across an intact corneal epithelium are currently marketed. 13 Most contain toxic agents to increase epithelial permeability, including benzalkonium chloride (BAC), highconcentration sodium chloride, sodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), or trometamol.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite these chemical enhancers, results in clinical studies with transepithelial riboflavin preparations have been equivocal: Some studies report similar efficacy to epithelium-off CXL, 14,15 but most report inferior results. [10][11][12][16][17][18] Iontophoresis, in which an electrical gradient is used to drive negatively charged riboflavin molecules across the intact epithelium, may further enhance riboflavin penetration in transepithelial CXL. Laboratory studies of iontophoresis have been encouraging, demonstrating enhanced transepithelial riboflavin penetration and improvement of corneal biomechanics.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%