Advertisement

 

 

Accelerated versus conventional corneal crosslinking for refractive instability: an update.

Accelerated versus conventional corneal crosslinking for refractive instability: an update.
Author Information (click to view)

Kymionis GD, Kontadakis GA, Hashemi KK,


Kymionis GD, Kontadakis GA, Hashemi KK, (click to view)

Kymionis GD, Kontadakis GA, Hashemi KK,

Advertisement
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Current opinion in ophthalmology 28(4) 343-347 doi 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000375
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Corneal crosslinking (CXL) is a relatively new treatment modality offering refractive stability in patients with ectatic disorders. The procedure as initially described (Dresden protocol) is time consuming; accelerated protocols have been lately developed. The purpose of this review is to present the recent findings regarding the comparison of accelerated CXL with the conventional Dresden protocol.

RECENT FINDINGS
A variety of accelerated protocols are described in the literature. Safety and efficacy of the procedures with regard to stability seem to be equivalent in initial studies but indirect measures of efficacy, such as demarcation line depth and laboratory measurements, do not always confirm equivalence of accelerated protocols in comparison to conventional one. Modified accelerated protocols must be developed in order to overcome this.

SUMMARY
Accelerated CXL protocols seem to be a valid alternative to the conventional protocol; however, more comparative long term studies are needed to confirm the validity and to elucidate which accelerated protocol is ideal in each case.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

11 + 4 =

[ HIDE/SHOW ]