Standard cross-linking protocol versus accelerated and transepithelial cross-linking protocols for treatment of paediatric keratoconus: a 2-year comparative study.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, safety and stability of standard epithelium-off cross-linking (SCXL) versus accelerated epithelium-off cross-linking (ACXL) and transepithelial epithelium-on cross-linking (TCXL) in the treatment of progressive keratoconus (KC) in children. METHODS: This prospective multicentre controlled trial included 271 eyes (136 children) with grade 1-3 progressive KC who were randomized to undergo SCXL (n = 91, as a control group), ACXL (n = 92) or TCXL (n = 88). Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, subjective refraction, pachymetry, keratometry and corneal topography measurements were recorded preoperatively and 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At 1 year, there was no significant difference in uncorrected distance visual acuity, refractive sphere, cylinder, spherical equivalent or Kmax between the ACXL and SCXL groups; however, during year 2, ACXL regressed while SCXL continued to improve. After 2 years, there were significant differences in all visual, refractive and keratometric components between SCXL and both ACXL and TCXL (p < 0.0001) and between ACXL and TCXL (p < 0.0001). KC progressed in 5.4% of patients who had ACXL and 28.4% of those who had TCXL but in none of those who had SCXL. Vernal keratoconjunctivitis was documented in 43.3% of eyes that progressed postoperatively. CONCLUSION: SCXL was more effective for paediatric KC and achieved greater stability than either ACXL or TCXL, and ACXL was superior to TCXL. SCXL also achieved marked improvement in both myopia and spherical equivalent; however, these refractive outcomes were unpredictable and uncontrollable. TCXL had a 28.4% failure rate within 2 years. SCXL is preferable for management of paediatric KC.

Review of Corneal Biomechanical Properties Following LASIK and SMILE for Myopia and Myopic Astigmatism.

Worldwide, femtosecond Laser Assisted In-situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) is a well known and commonly used refractive technique, although Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) has become increasingly popular since it was introduced in 2011. In LASIK, a corneal flap is cut with a microkeratome or femtosecond laser, followed by thinning of the stromal bed with excimer laser ablation. In SMILE, a minor intrastromal lenticule is cut with a femtosecond laser and subsequently removed through a small incision, leaving the anterior and strongest part of the cornea almost intact. Both LASIK and SMILE require cutting of corneal lamellae that may reduce the biomechanical stability of the cornea, with the potential risk of corneal iatrogenic ectasia as a severe complication. However, SMILE preserves the anterior corneal integrity and may, in theory, better preserve the corneal biomechanical strength than LASIK after surgery. A review aimed to examine the current literature that describes and compares the corneal biomechanical properties after Laser Assisted In-situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE). A comprehensive search was performed in Pubmed.gov using the following search queries: Corneal biomechanical properties, corneal biomechanics, ocular response analyser, ocular response analyzer, ORA, ex vivo, in vitro, Corvis, Corvis ST, LASIK, and SMILE.