Suppr超能文献

比较使用标准或个性化角膜曲率计阈值进行胶原交联术后角膜圆锥的进展。

A comparison of keratoconus progression following collagen cross-linkage using standard or personalised keratometry thresholds.

机构信息

Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.

UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, 11-43 Bath Street, London, EC1V 9EL, UK.

出版信息

Eye (Lond). 2024 Jun;38(9):1681-1686. doi: 10.1038/s41433-024-02994-6. Epub 2024 Feb 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To define how estimates of keratoconus progression following collagen cross-linking (CXL) vary according to the parameter selected to measure corneal shape.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We estimated progression following CXL in 1677 eyes. We compared standard definitions of keratoconus progression based on published thresholds for Kmax, front K2, or back K2, or progression of any two of these three parameters, with the option of an increased threshold for Kmax values ≥ 55D. As corneal thickness reduces unpredictably after CXL, it was excluded from the principal analysis. We then repeated the analysis using novel adaptive estimates of progression for Kmax, front K2, or back K2, developed separately using 6463 paired readings from keratoconus eyes, with a variation of the Bland-Altman method to determine the 95% regression-based limits of agreement (LoA). We created Kaplan-Meier survival plots for both standard and adaptive thresholds. The primary outcome was progression five years after a baseline visit 9-15 months following CXL.

RESULTS

Progression rates were 8% with a standard (≥ 1.5D) threshold for K2 or 6% with the static multi-parameter definition. With a ≥ 1D threshold for Kmax, the progression was significantly higher at 29%. With adaptive Kmax or K2, the progression rates were similar (20%) but less than with the adaptive multi-parameter method (22%).

CONCLUSIONS

Estimates of keratoconus progression following CXL vary widely according to the reference criteria. Using adaptive thresholds (LoA) to define the repeatability of keratometry gives estimates for progression that are markedly higher than with the standard multi-parameter method.

摘要

目的

根据角膜形状测量参数的选择,确定交联(CXL)后圆锥角膜进展的评估结果有何差异。

材料与方法

我们对 1677 只眼的 CXL 后进展情况进行了评估。我们比较了基于 Kmax、前 K2 或后 K2 发表阈值的标准圆锥角膜进展定义,或这些三个参数中的任意两个的进展,同时还可以选择 Kmax 值增加阈值≥55D。由于交联后角膜厚度不可预测地降低,因此该因素未包含在主要分析中。然后,我们使用从圆锥角膜眼中分别开发的 Kmax、前 K2 或后 K2 的新自适应进展估计值,使用 6463 对配对读数重复了分析,采用 Bland-Altman 方法的变体来确定基于 95%回归的一致性界限(LoA)。我们为标准和自适应阈值创建了 Kaplan-Meier 生存图。主要结局是在 CXL 后 9-15 个月的基线检查后五年的进展情况。

结果

使用 K2 的标准(≥1.5D)阈值或静态多参数定义,进展率为 8%;Kmax 的阈值为≥1D 时,进展显著更高,为 29%。使用自适应 Kmax 或 K2,进展率相似(20%),但低于自适应多参数方法(22%)。

结论

交联后圆锥角膜进展的评估结果因参考标准而差异很大。使用自适应阈值(LoA)定义角膜曲率计的可重复性可得出进展评估,该评估结果明显高于标准多参数方法。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验