-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Acute bacterial meningitis is a bacterial infection of the membranes that surround and protect the brain, known as the meninges. The primary therapy for bacterial... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute bacterial meningitis is a bacterial infection of the membranes that surround and protect the brain, known as the meninges. The primary therapy for bacterial meningitis is antibiotics and corticosteroids. Although these therapies significantly improve outcomes, bacterial meningitis still has a high risk of death and a high risk of neurological sequelae in survivors. New adjuvant therapies are needed to further reduce the risk of death and neurological sequelae in bacterial meningitis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of non-corticosteroid adjuvant pharmacological therapies for mortality, hearing loss, and other neurological sequelae in people with acute bacterial meningitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS databases and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP trials registers up to 30 September 2021, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any pharmacological adjuvant therapy for acute bacterial meningitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed and extracted data on methods, participants, interventions, and outcomes. We assessed risk of bias of studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We presented results using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) when meta-analysis was possible. All other results are presented in a narrative synthesis.
MAIN RESULTS
We found that five different adjuvant therapies have been tested in RCTs for bacterial meningitis. These include paracetamol (3 studies, 1274 participants who were children); immunoglobulins (2 studies, 49 participants; one study included children, and the other adults); heparin (1 study, 15 participants who were adults); pentoxifylline (1 study, 57 participants who were children); and a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide (1 study, 30 participants who were children). Paracetamol may make little or no difference to mortality (paracetamol 35.2% versus placebo 37.4%, 95% CI 30.3% to 40.8%; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 3 studies, 1274 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence); hearing loss (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.34; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence); neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.50; 3 studies, 1274 participants; I² = 60%; low certainty evidence); and severe hearing loss (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.36; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may lead to slightly more short-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.81; 2 studies, 1096 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) and slightly more long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.04; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group in any of the paracetamol studies (very low certainty evidence). Two paracetamol studies had a low risk of bias in most domains, and one had low or unclear risk of bias in all domains. We judged the certainty of evidence to be low for mortality due to limitations in study design (unclear risk of bias in at least one domain and imprecision (high level of uncertainty in absolute effects), and low for all other outcomes due to limitations in study design (unclear risk of bias in at least one domain), and imprecision (low sample size and few events) or inconsistency in effect estimates (heterogeneity). We were not able to perform meta-analysis for any of the other adjuvant therapies due to the limited number of included studies. It is uncertain whether immunoglobulins, heparin, or pentoxifylline improves mortality outcomes due to the very low certainty of the evidence. Zero adverse events were reported for immunoglobulins (very low certainty evidence), and allergic reactions occurred at a rate of 3.3% in participants receiving a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide (intervention group) (very low certainty evidence). None of our other outcomes (hearing loss, neurological sequelae other than hearing loss, severe hearing loss, and short-term or long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss) were reported in these studies, and all of these studies were judged to have a high risk of bias. All reported outcomes for all included adjuvant therapies, other than paracetamol, were graded as very low certainty of evidence due to limitations in study design (unclear or high risk of bias in at least four domains) and imprecision (extremely low sample size and few events).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Few adjuvant therapies for bacterial meningitis have been tested in RCTs. Paracetamol may make little or no difference to mortality, with a high level of uncertainty in the absolute effects (low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may make little or no difference to hearing loss, neurological sequelae other than hearing loss, and severe hearing loss (all low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may lead to slightly more short-term and long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (both outcomes low certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether any of the adjuvant therapies included in this review (paracetamol, immunoglobulins, heparin, pentoxifylline, or a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide) are beneficial or detrimental in acute bacterial meningitis.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Hearing Loss; Humans; Meningitis, Bacterial
PubMed: 34813078
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013437.pub2 -
Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences 2021The aim of this article was to evaluate reports in the scientific literature that used antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) with a blue light source and curcumin... (Review)
Review
The aim of this article was to evaluate reports in the scientific literature that used antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) with a blue light source and curcumin and riboflavin as photosensitizers in the management of periodontitis. The search was conducted in electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, with the keywords "photodynamic therapy", "antimicrobial photodynamic therapy", "laser activated disinfection", "photoactivated disinfection", "light activated disinfection" "LED", "Periodontitis", "Curcumin", "Riboflavin", and "periodontitis" from 2012 to 2020. After evaluating a total of 24 relevant articles, 13 articles were selected, full texts were read, and the data were extracted and placed in a table. Reviewing articles showed that curcumin as a photosensitizer activated by a blue wavelength is effective in the elimination of the various bacterial species involved in periodontal disease, and to the best of our knowledge, there is no study that has shown this substance does not reduce bacteria. According to the result of the articles, riboflavin as a photosensitizer activated by blue light can reduce bacteria that are involved in periodontitis, but other studies have reported that blue light alone can also reduce bacteria significantly. Therefore, more in-vitro and clinical trial studies are needed to give a more conclusive opinion on the effectiveness of riboflavin as a photosensitizer in the treatment of periodontitis.
PubMed: 34733738
DOI: 10.34172/jlms.2021.15 -
Cornea Jul 2022Corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) is an effective treatment to slow down keratoconus (KC) progression in adults. Several studies have also shown efficacious outcomes...
PURPOSE
Corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) is an effective treatment to slow down keratoconus (KC) progression in adults. Several studies have also shown efficacious outcomes in pediatric populations, yet no systematic analysis has been performed and no accepted definition for progression is available in children after CXL. This study aimed to establish the most commonly used criteria for progression and to conduct a systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis to assess children's keratoconus progression after CXL.
METHODS
A systemic literature review combined with pooled analysis was performed on full-length studies of KC after CXL treatment in a pediatric population and the methods used to report progression were analyzed.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven studies (2078 eyes) were identified on the rates of KC progression after CXL. The most common method to report progression was increased Kmax, Kmean, or Ksteep by ≥1.0 diopter (78.3% of studies). Using these criteria, the mean pooled progression rate after epithelium-off CXL was 9.9% (95% confidence interval: 6.1% -14.6%, total pooled sample size: 1508 eyes) with high heterogeneity between studies [I 2 = 86.48% (95% confidence interval: 80.98 - 90.39), P < 0.0001].
CONCLUSIONS
When considering KC progression after CXL in children, with an increase in Kmax, Kmean, or Ksteep ≥ 1.0 diopter, the progression risk was roughly 10%. We encourage clear quantitative reporting of KC progression in future studies evaluating CXL efficacy in pediatric populations.
Topics: Adult; Child; Collagen; Corneal Topography; Cross-Linking Reagents; Humans; Keratoconus; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Riboflavin; Ultraviolet Rays; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 34294638
DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000002808 -
American Journal of Ophthalmology Sep 2021The purpose of this study was to summarize key findings from a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of transepithelial corneal crosslinking (CXL) compared... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to summarize key findings from a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of transepithelial corneal crosslinking (CXL) compared with epithelium-off CXL for progressive keratoconus.
DESIGN
Cochrane systematic review.
METHODS
We included in our review only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which transepithelial and epithelium-off CXL had been compared among participants with progressive keratoconus. The primary outcome was keratoconus stabilization based on post-operative maximum keratometry (Kmax). We adhered to Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, risk of bias evaluation, and data synthesis.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs with 567 participants (661 eyes) were included; 11 studies compared non-iontophoresis-assisted transepithelial with epithelium-off CXL. Keratoconus stabilization was described as an outcome in 2 studies. The estimated difference in Kmax means (ie, the "mean difference," MD) from meta-analysis of 177 eyes in 5 RCTs indicated that there were no differences between intervention groups in Kmax at 12 months or later (MD: 0.99 diopter [D]; 95% confidence interval: -0.11 to 2.09). Meta-analysis of keratometry and visual acuity outcomes at 12 months or longer after surgery from 2 studies that had compared transepithelial CXL using iontophoresis provided no conclusive evidence of an advantage over epithelium-off CXL.
CONCLUSIONS
Lack of precision due to small sample sizes, indeterminate risk of bias due to inadequate reporting, and inconsistency in how outcomes were measured and reported among studies make it difficult to state with confidence whether transepithelial CXL confers an advantage over epithelium-off CXL for patients with progressive keratoconus with respect to stabilization of keratoconus, visual acuity, or patient-reported outcomes based on available data.
Topics: Collagen; Corneal Pachymetry; Corneal Topography; Cross-Linking Reagents; Epithelium; Humans; Keratoconus; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Riboflavin; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 34048801
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.05.009 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2021Diagnosis of pediatric steatohepatitis is a challenging issue due to a vast number of established and novel causes. Here, we report a child with Multiple Acyl-CoA...
Diagnosis of pediatric steatohepatitis is a challenging issue due to a vast number of established and novel causes. Here, we report a child with Multiple Acyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiency (MADD) presenting with an underrated muscle weakness, exercise intolerance and an atypically severe steatotic liver involvement. A systematic literature review of liver involvement in MADD was performed as well. Our patient is a 11-year-old otherwise healthy, non-obese, male child admitted for some weakness/asthenia, vomiting and recurrent severe hypertransaminasemia (aspartate and alanine aminotransferases up to ×20 times upper limit of normal). Hepatic ultrasound showed a bright liver. MRI detected mild lipid storage of thighs muscles. A liver biopsy showed a micro-macrovacuolar steatohepatitis with minimal fibrosis. Main causes of hypertransaminasemia were ruled out. Serum aminoacids (increased proline), acylcarnitines (increased C4-C18) and a large excretion of urinary glutaric acid, ethylmalonic, butyric, isobutyric, 2-methyl-butyric and isovaleric acids suggested a diagnosis of MADD. Serum acylcarnitines and urinary organic acids fluctuated overtime paralleling serum transaminases during periods of illness/catabolic stress, confirming their recurrent nature. Genetic testing confirmed the diagnosis [homozygous c.1658A > G (p.Tyr553Cys) in exon 12 of the ETFDH gene]. Lipid-restricted diet and riboflavin treatment rapidly ameliorated symptoms, hepatic ultrasonography/enzymes, and metabolic profiles. Literature review (37 retrieved eligible studies, 283 patients) showed that liver is an extramuscular organ rarely involved in late-onset MADD (70 patients), and that amongst 45 patients who had fatty liver only nine had severe presentation. MADD is a disorder with a clinically heterogeneous phenotype. Our study suggests that MADD warrants consideration in the work-up of obesity-unrelated severe steatohepatitis.
PubMed: 34041209
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.672004 -
Journal of Cataract and Refractive... Oct 2021Corneal crosslinking (CXL) is the current mainstay treatment for progressive keratoconus. In the past 15 years, a variety of other indications have been tested. A...
Corneal crosslinking (CXL) is the current mainstay treatment for progressive keratoconus. In the past 15 years, a variety of other indications have been tested. A systematic review was conducted to examine these alternative indications for CXL. In total, 143 papers on crosslinking as a treatment for infectious keratitis, bullous keratopathy, pellucid marginal degeneration, and postlaser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) ectasia and as a way to improve vision either on its own or in combination with other interventions were included. Post-LASIK ectasia is a definite indication for crosslinking. Surprisingly, only limited research has been performed on pellucid marginal degeneration, with no randomized trials available to date. Other interesting applications are the combined use of refractive lasers and crosslinking for suspicious or ectatic corneas and crosslinking as a standalone intervention for minor refractive errors. CXL might offer a solution for refractory bacterial keratitis. In bullous keratopathy, it seems to offer only a transient benefit.
Topics: Collagen; Cornea; Corneal Topography; Cross-Linking Reagents; Humans; Keratoconus; Keratomileusis, Laser In Situ; Photosensitizing Agents; Riboflavin; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 33929804
DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000663 -
Nutrition Reviews Feb 2022The results from epidemiologic studies on the intake of dietary vitamin B1, B2, B6, and B12 and association with risk of developing depression have been inconsistent. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
The results from epidemiologic studies on the intake of dietary vitamin B1, B2, B6, and B12 and association with risk of developing depression have been inconsistent.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the existing evidence and synthesize the results.
DATA SOURCES
The databases of Web of Science and PubMed were searched for relevant articles published in English until September 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Observational studies that evaluated the associations between depression and dietary vitamin B1, B2, B6, and B12 were included in this study.
DATA EXTRACTION
The job of data extraction was undertaken by 2 authors, and the pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a fixed-effects model.
RESULTS
Thirteen articles related to 18 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled RR (95% CI) of depression for the highest vs the lowest category of dietary vitamin B1, B2, B6, and B12 was 0.69 (0.55-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.89), 0.81 (0.71-0.93), and 0.86 (0.75-0.99), respectively. The pooled RR (95% CI) of depression for the highest vs the lowest category of dietary vitamin B2 was 0.80 (0.64-0.99) in females and 0.83 (0.67-1.02) in males, for dietary vitamin B6 was 0.71 (0.59-0.86) in females and 0.92 (0.76-1.12) in males, and for dietary vitamin B12 was 0.79 (0.65-0.97) in females and 0.94 (0.77-1.15) in males.
CONCLUSION
This study suggested that the intake of dietary vitamin B1, B2, B6, and B12 may be inversely associated with the risk of depression; the inverse associations observed between depression and intake of dietary vitamin B2, B6, and B12 were significant in females, but not in males. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.
Topics: Depression; Female; Folic Acid; Humans; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Riboflavin; Thiamine; Vitamin B 12; Vitamin B 6
PubMed: 33912967
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuab014 -
Effect of Vitamin B2 supplementation on migraine prophylaxis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nutritional Neuroscience Sep 2022Migraine is a common disease worldwide and migraine prevention is primarily currently based on pharmaceuticals. The mechanism of Vitamin B2 may positively contribute to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Migraine is a common disease worldwide and migraine prevention is primarily currently based on pharmaceuticals. The mechanism of Vitamin B2 may positively contribute to migraine. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of Vitamin B2 supplementation on the days, duration, frequency, and pain score of the migraine attack.
METHODS
: The PRISMA guideline was used for the studying process. Five electronic databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and CEPS were searched from 1990 to March 2019. The search terms were Vitamin B2, migraine, and prophylactic. A meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) version.
RESULTS
: Nine articles were included in systemic review and finally meta-analysis. Eight randomized controlled trials and one controlled clinical trial with 673 subjects were analyzed using meta-analysis. Vitamin B2 supplementation significantly decreased migraine days (= .005, = 89%), duration (= .003, = 0), frequency (= .001, = 65%), and pain score (= .015, = 84%).
CONCLUSIONS
A pooled analysis of available randomized controlled clinical trials demonstrated that Vitamin B2 400 mg/day for three months supplementation had significant effect on days, duration, frequency, and pain score of migraine attacks.
Topics: Dietary Supplements; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Riboflavin
PubMed: 33779525
DOI: 10.1080/1028415X.2021.1904542 -
Journal of Cataract and Refractive... Aug 2021Corneal crosslinking is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration--approved therapy to stiffen the cornea and prevent progression of corneal ectasia in patients with...
Corneal crosslinking is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration--approved therapy to stiffen the cornea and prevent progression of corneal ectasia in patients with keratoconus. The standard procedure involves removal of the corneal epithelium (epithelial-off) prior to treatment. Variations to the standard procedure include accelerated crosslinking and transepithelial procedures. This study reviewed what is known regarding the risk for infection after epithelial-off crosslinking, the spectrum of pathogens, and clinical outcomes. 26 publications were identified. All eyes were fit with a bandage contact lens postoperatively. Available data indicate that the overall frequency of infectious keratitis after epithelium-off crosslinking is low. Bacterial infections are the most common, with a mean time of presentation of 4.8 days postoperatively. The use of steroids and bandage contact lenses in the immediate postoperative period and/or a history of atopic or herpetic disease were associated with infection. These patients require intense postoperative care with prophylactic antiviral therapy when appropriate.
Topics: Collagen; Cornea; Cross-Linking Reagents; Humans; Keratitis; Keratoconus; Photosensitizing Agents; Riboflavin
PubMed: 33769765
DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000620 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021Keratoconus is the most common corneal dystrophy. It can cause loss of uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity through ectasia (thinning) of the central or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Keratoconus is the most common corneal dystrophy. It can cause loss of uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity through ectasia (thinning) of the central or paracentral cornea, irregular corneal scarring, or corneal perforation. Disease onset usually occurs in the second to fourth decade of life, periods of peak educational attainment or career development. The condition is lifelong and sight-threatening. Corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) using ultraviolet A (UVA) light applied to the cornea is the only treatment that has been shown to slow progression of disease. The original, more widely known technique involves application of UVA light to de-epithelialized cornea, to which a photosensitizer (riboflavin) is added topically throughout the irradiation process. Transepithelial CXL is a recently advocated alternative to the standard CXL procedure, in that the epithelium is kept intact during CXL. Retention of the epithelium offers the putative advantages of faster healing, less patient discomfort, faster visual rehabilitation, and less risk of corneal haze.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of transepithelial CXL compared with epithelium-off CXL for progressive keratoconus.
SEARCH METHODS
To identify potentially eligible studies, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2020, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not impose any date or language restrictions. We last searched the electronic databases on 15 January 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which transepithelial CXL had been compared with epithelium-off CXL in participants with progressive keratoconus.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies with 723 eyes of 578 participants enrolled; 13 to 119 participants were enrolled per study. Seven studies were conducted in Europe, three in the Middle East, and one each in India, Russia, and Turkey. Seven studies were parallel-group RCTs, one study was an RCT with a paired-eyes design, and five studies were RCTs in which both eyes of some or all participants were assigned to the same intervention. Eleven studies compared transepithelial CXL with epithelium-off CXL in participants with progressive keratoconus. There was no evidence of an important difference between intervention groups in maximum keratometry (denoted 'maximum K' or 'Kmax'; also known as steepest keratometry measurement) at 12 months or later (mean difference (MD) 0.99 diopters (D), 95% CI -0.11 to 2.09; 5 studies; 177 eyes; I = 41%; very low certainty evidence). Few studies described other outcomes of interest. The evidence is very uncertain that epithelium-off CXL may have a small (data from two studies were not pooled due to considerable heterogeneity (I = 92%)) or no effect on stabilization of progressive keratoconus compared with transepithelial CXL; comparison of the estimated proportions of eyes with decreases or increases of 2 or more diopters in maximum K at 12 months from one study with 61 eyes was RR 0.32 (95% CI 0.09 to 1.12) and RR (non-event) 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.00), respectively (very low certainty). We did not estimate an overall effect on corrected-distance visual acuity (CDVA) because substantial heterogeneity was detected (I = 70%). No study evaluated CDVA gain or loss of 10 or more letters on a logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) chart. Transepithelial CXL may result in little to no difference in CDVA at 12 months or beyond. Four studies reported that either no adverse events or no serious adverse events had been observed. Another study noted no change in endothelial cell count after either procedure. Moderate certainty evidence from 4 studies (221 eyes) found that epithelium-off CXL resulted in a slight increase in corneal haze or scarring when compared to transepithelial CXL (RR (non-event) 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.14). Three studies, one of which had three arms, compared outcomes among participants assigned to transepithelial CXL using iontophoresis versus those assigned to epithelium-off CXL. No conclusive evidence was found for either keratometry or visual acuity outcomes at 12 months or later after surgery. Low certainty evidence suggests that transepithelial CXL using iontophoresis results in no difference in logMAR CDVA (MD 0.00 letter, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.04; 2 studies; 51 eyes). Only one study examined gain or loss of 10 or more logMAR letters. In terms of adverse events, one case of subepithelial infiltrate was reported after transepithelial CXL with iontophoresis, whereas two cases of faint corneal scars and four cases of permanent haze were observed after epithelium-off CXL. Vogt's striae were found in one eye after each intervention. The certainty of the evidence was low or very low for the outcomes in this comparison due to imprecision of estimates for all outcomes and risk of bias in the studies from which data have been reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Because of lack of precision, frequent indeterminate risk of bias due to inadequate reporting, and inconsistency in outcomes measured and reported among studies in this systematic review, it remains unknown whether transepithelial CXL, or any other approach, may confer an advantage over epithelium-off CXL for patients with progressive keratoconus with respect to further progression of keratoconus, visual acuity outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Arrest of the progression of keratoconus should be the primary outcome of interest in future trials of CXL, particularly when comparing the effectiveness of different approaches to CXL. Furthermore, methods of assessing and defining progressive keratoconus should be standardized. Trials with longer follow-up are required in order to assure that outcomes are measured after corneal wound-healing and stabilization of keratoconus. In addition, perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care should be standardized to permit meaningful comparisons of CXL methods. Methods to increase penetration of riboflavin through intact epithelium as well as delivery of increased dose of UVA may be needed to improve outcomes. PROs should be measured and reported. The visual significance of adverse outcomes, such as corneal haze, should be assessed and correlated with other outcomes, including PROs.
Topics: Adult; Bias; Collagen; Corneal Pachymetry; Cross-Linking Reagents; Dextrans; Disease Progression; Epithelium, Corneal; Female; Humans; Iontophoresis; Keratoconus; Male; Photosensitizing Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Riboflavin; Ultraviolet Therapy; Visual Acuity; Young Adult
PubMed: 33765359
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013512.pub2