Late-onset corneal edema after customized crosslinking for progressive keratoconus.

Purpose: We describe a patient after customized crosslinking (CXL) for progressive keratoconus who developed corneal edema with spontaneous resolution. Observations: A 24-year-old male with progressive keratoconus of the left eye underwent a customized CXL procedure with a total energy of 10 J/cm2 for 16.4 minutes. Preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 20/30 with a maximum keratometry (K)-value of 58.6 diopter (D) and the thinnest point measured 414 µm. The preoperative endothelial cell density (ECD) was 2414 cells/mm2. During treatment, corneal thickness was 325 µm after epithelial debridement and 375 µm after the application of 0.1 % riboflavin containing HPMC. After the treatment, antibiotic and steroid drops were prescribed for 5 days and 3 weeks, respectively. At the 1-month post-CXL visit the patient had no complaints, visual acuity and clinical examination showed no irregularities. At the 4-months post-CXL visit the patient complained of blurry vision. The CDVA was 20/100 and slit-lamp examination showed microcystic corneal edema. The corneal thickness at the thinnest point measured 440 µm. One month later the edema had resolved spontaneously and CDVA had restored to 20/25. Corneal thickness at the thinnest point measured 415 µm, the ECD was 1514 cells/mm2 and confocal microscopy showed normal structural changes in the anterior stroma after CXL, with the demarcation line located at a depth of 414 µm, just above the corneal endothelium. Conclusions and importance: We report a case of corneal edema following customized CXL with endothelial cell loss that resolved spontaneously. We recommend either adhering to a minimal stromal thickness of 400 µm before administering UV-A irradiation, using a contact lens or adjusting the irradiation to prevent this complication.

Accuracy of Toric Intraocular Lens Calculations Using Estimated Versus Measured Posterior Corneal Astigmatism.

PURPOSE: To compare the prediction accuracy of toric intraocular lens calculations using estimated vs measured posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA). DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: A total of 110 eyes of 110 patients with uncomplicated toric intraocular lens implantation were included in this study. Predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism was calculated with the Barrett Toric Calculator using the estimated PCA (E-PCA), the measured IOLMaster 700 PCA (I-PCA), and the measured Pentacam PCA (P-PCA). Refractive astigmatism prediction errors (RA-PEs), including their trimmed (tr-) centroid (mean vector), spread (precision), tr-mean absolute RA-PE (accuracy), and percentage within a certain threshold, were determined using vector analysis and compared between groups. SETTING: University Eye Clinic, Maastricht University Medical Center+, the Netherlands. RESULTS: The tr-centroid RA-PEs of the E-PCA (0.02 diopter [D] at 82.2°), the I-PCA (0.08 D at 35.5°), and the P-PCA (0.09 D at 69.1°) were significantly different from each other (P < .01), but not significantly different from zero (P = .75, P = .05, and P = .05, respectively). The E-PCA had the best precision (tr-mean 0.40 D), which was not significantly lower than the I-PCA (0.42 D, P = .53) and P-PCA (0.43 D, P = .06). The E-PCA also had the best accuracy (0.40 D), which was not significantly different from the I-PCA (0.42 D, P = .26) and significantly better than the P-PCA (0.44 D, P < .01). The precision and accuracy of the I-PCA did not significantly differ from those of the P-PCA. There were no statistically significant differences in the percentage of eyes within a certain absolute RA-PE threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The Barrett Toric Calculator using the E-PCA, I-PCA, or P-PCA showed a comparable prediction of postoperative refractive astigmatism in standard clinical practice.

Efficacy of customized corneal crosslinking versus standard corneal crosslinking in patients with progressive keratoconus (C-CROSS study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Keratoconus is a degenerative disorder of the cornea leading to a protrusion and thinning with loss of visual acuity. The only treatment to halt the progression is corneal crosslinking (CXL), which uses riboflavin and UV-A light to stiffen the cornea. Recent ultra-structural examinations show that the disease is regional and does not affect the entire cornea. Treating only the affected zone with CXL could be as good as the standard CXL, that treats the entire cornea. METHODS: We set up a multicentre non-inferiority randomized controlled clinical trial comparing standard CXL (sCXL) and customized CXL (cCXL). Patients between 16 and 45 years old with progressive keratoconus were included. Progression is based on one or more of the following changes within 12 months: 1 dioptre (D) increase in keratometry (Kmax, K1, K2); or 10% decrease of corneal thickness; or 1 D increase in myopia or refractive astigmatism, requiring corneal crosslinking. DISCUSSION: The goal of this study is to evaluate whether the effectiveness of cCXL is non-inferior to sCXL in terms of flattening of the cornea and halting keratoconus progression. Treating only the affected zone could be beneficial for minimalizing the risk of damaging surrounding tissues and faster wound healing. Recent non-randomized studies suggest that a customized crosslinking protocol based on the tomography of the patient's cornea may stop the progression of keratoconus and result in flattening of the cornea. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on August 31st, 2020, the identifier of the study is NCT04532788.

Accuracy of intraocular lens calculations in eyes with keratoconus.

PURPOSE: To compare the prediction accuracy of the Barrett True-K for keratoconus with standard formulas (SRK/T, Barrett Universal II, and Kane) and the Kane keratoconus formula. SETTING: Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel, and University Eye Clinic, Maastricht, the Netherlands. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective case series. METHODS: Eyes with stable keratoconus undergoing cataract surgery were included. The predicted refractions were calculated for SRK/T, Barrett Universal II, Barrett True-K for keratoconus (predicted and measured), Kane, and Kane adjusted for keratoconus formulas. Primary outcomes were prediction error (PE), absolute error (AE), and percentage of eyes with PE ±0.25 diopters (D), ±0.50 D, and ±1.00 D. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the severity of the keratoconus. RESULTS: 57 eyes were included in the study. The PE was not significantly different from zero for SRK/T, Barrett True-K (predicted and measured), and Kane keratoconus formulas (range 0.09 to 0.22 D, P > .05). The AE of Barrett True-K predicted (median 0.14 D) and Barrett True-K measured (median 0.10 D) were significantly lower from Barrett Universal II (median 0.47 D) and Kane (median 0.50 D), P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The Barrett True-K formulas for keratoconus had higher prediction accuracy as compared with new generation formulas and a similar prediction accuracy as compared with the Kane keratoconus formula.