术前获得的自动客观测量结果能否估计角膜交联术后的矫正视力?

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmology and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1007/s40123-024-00993-0
Fanka Gilevska, Alma Biscevic, Maja Bohac, Sudi Patel
{"title":"术前获得的自动客观测量结果能否估计角膜交联术后的矫正视力?","authors":"Fanka Gilevska, Alma Biscevic, Maja Bohac, Sudi Patel","doi":"10.1007/s40123-024-00993-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Objective markers describing corneal optical density (COD), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), and anterior (ARC) and posterior (PRC) surface radii over the 3 mm thinnest region of the cornea were investigated to provide a model for estimating corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) after corneal cross-linking (CXL) in keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CDVA, COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC were monitored (using Pentacam™) over 1 year in patients with (1) keratoconus treated with routine CXL (2) relatively stable untreated keratoconus, and (3) age/gender-matched controls.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In group 1 (n = 77), the median logMAR CDVA (mode, interquartile range) improved significantly (p < 0.01) from 0.26 (0.22, 0.12-0.65) to 0.07 (0.00, 0.02-0.21). The mean (± standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) COD (in 0-100 grey scale units) in the 0-2 mm central anterior corneal region (0-2 ant), TCT (µm), ARC (mm), and PRC (mm) changed significantly (p < 0.01), from 21.2 (± 3.70, 20.4-22.0), 454 (± 40.0, 446-462), 6.49 (± 0.71, 6.33-6.65), and 4.81 (± 0.65, 4.66-4.96) to 31.5 (± 9.19, 29.5-33.6), 423 (± 49.3, 412-434), 6.78 (± 0.80, 6.60-6.98), and 4.74 (± 0.64, 4.59-4.88), respectively, but remained stable in groups 2 (n = 23) and 3 (n = 24). Significant relationships (p < 0.01) were uncovered between postop CDVA and preop values of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC. Multilinear regression revealed significant correlations between CDVA at 1 year and preop COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.533, r<sup>2</sup><sub>0-2ant</sub> = 0.126, r<sup>2</sup><sub>TCT</sub> = 0.321, r<sup>2</sup><sub>ARC</sub> = 0.506, r<sup>2</sup><sub>PRC</sub> = 0.467). Including preop CDVA further enhanced this correlation (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.637, r<sup>2</sup><sub>LogMAR CDVApreop</sub> = 0.566).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CXL improved CDVA, increased COD and ARC, and reduced TCT and PRC. The chance of correctly estimating the CDVA at 1 year after CXL using preoperative markers of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC is 53%, improving to 64% with the inclusion of preoperative CDVA. Objective measurements taken at the preoperative screening stage may be useful to estimate the likely postoperative CDVA when preoperative CDVA measures are unreliable or unobtainable.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06522789.</p>","PeriodicalId":19623,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11408454/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity after Corneal Cross-Linking in Keratoconus?\",\"authors\":\"Fanka Gilevska, Alma Biscevic, Maja Bohac, Sudi Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40123-024-00993-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Objective markers describing corneal optical density (COD), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), and anterior (ARC) and posterior (PRC) surface radii over the 3 mm thinnest region of the cornea were investigated to provide a model for estimating corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) after corneal cross-linking (CXL) in keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CDVA, COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC were monitored (using Pentacam™) over 1 year in patients with (1) keratoconus treated with routine CXL (2) relatively stable untreated keratoconus, and (3) age/gender-matched controls.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In group 1 (n = 77), the median logMAR CDVA (mode, interquartile range) improved significantly (p < 0.01) from 0.26 (0.22, 0.12-0.65) to 0.07 (0.00, 0.02-0.21). The mean (± standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) COD (in 0-100 grey scale units) in the 0-2 mm central anterior corneal region (0-2 ant), TCT (µm), ARC (mm), and PRC (mm) changed significantly (p < 0.01), from 21.2 (± 3.70, 20.4-22.0), 454 (± 40.0, 446-462), 6.49 (± 0.71, 6.33-6.65), and 4.81 (± 0.65, 4.66-4.96) to 31.5 (± 9.19, 29.5-33.6), 423 (± 49.3, 412-434), 6.78 (± 0.80, 6.60-6.98), and 4.74 (± 0.64, 4.59-4.88), respectively, but remained stable in groups 2 (n = 23) and 3 (n = 24). Significant relationships (p < 0.01) were uncovered between postop CDVA and preop values of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC. Multilinear regression revealed significant correlations between CDVA at 1 year and preop COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.533, r<sup>2</sup><sub>0-2ant</sub> = 0.126, r<sup>2</sup><sub>TCT</sub> = 0.321, r<sup>2</sup><sub>ARC</sub> = 0.506, r<sup>2</sup><sub>PRC</sub> = 0.467). Including preop CDVA further enhanced this correlation (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.637, r<sup>2</sup><sub>LogMAR CDVApreop</sub> = 0.566).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CXL improved CDVA, increased COD and ARC, and reduced TCT and PRC. The chance of correctly estimating the CDVA at 1 year after CXL using preoperative markers of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC is 53%, improving to 64% with the inclusion of preoperative CDVA. Objective measurements taken at the preoperative screening stage may be useful to estimate the likely postoperative CDVA when preoperative CDVA measures are unreliable or unobtainable.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06522789.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19623,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11408454/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-024-00993-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-024-00993-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

介绍:研究了描述角膜光学密度(COD)、角膜最薄厚度(TCT)、角膜最薄3毫米区域的前表面(ARC)和后表面(PRC)半径的客观指标,以便为估计角膜交联(CXL)后的矫正远视力(CDVA)提供一个模型:使用 Pentacam™ 对以下患者进行为期一年的 CDVA、COD、TCT、ARC 和 PRC 监测:(1) 接受常规 CXL 治疗的角膜病患者;(2) 病情相对稳定、未经治疗的角膜病患者;(3) 年龄/性别匹配的对照组:在第 1 组(n = 77)中,CDVA 的中位数 logMAR(模式,四分位数间距)显著改善(p 2 = 0.533,r20-2ant = 0.126,r2TCT = 0.321,r2ARC = 0.506,r2PRC = 0.467)。将术前 CDVA 计算在内会进一步增强这种相关性(r2 = 0.637,r2LogMAR CDVApreop = 0.566):结论:CXL 改善了 CDVA,增加了 COD 和 ARC,降低了 TCT 和 PRC。使用术前COD、TCT、ARC和PRC指标正确估算CXL术后1年CDVA的几率为53%,而加入术前CDVA后,正确估算CDVA的几率提高到64%。在术前CDVA测量不可靠或无法获得的情况下,术前筛查阶段进行的客观测量可能有助于估计术后可能的CDVA:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier,NCT06522789。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity after Corneal Cross-Linking in Keratoconus?

Introduction: Objective markers describing corneal optical density (COD), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), and anterior (ARC) and posterior (PRC) surface radii over the 3 mm thinnest region of the cornea were investigated to provide a model for estimating corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) after corneal cross-linking (CXL) in keratoconus.

Methods: CDVA, COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC were monitored (using Pentacam™) over 1 year in patients with (1) keratoconus treated with routine CXL (2) relatively stable untreated keratoconus, and (3) age/gender-matched controls.

Results: In group 1 (n = 77), the median logMAR CDVA (mode, interquartile range) improved significantly (p < 0.01) from 0.26 (0.22, 0.12-0.65) to 0.07 (0.00, 0.02-0.21). The mean (± standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) COD (in 0-100 grey scale units) in the 0-2 mm central anterior corneal region (0-2 ant), TCT (µm), ARC (mm), and PRC (mm) changed significantly (p < 0.01), from 21.2 (± 3.70, 20.4-22.0), 454 (± 40.0, 446-462), 6.49 (± 0.71, 6.33-6.65), and 4.81 (± 0.65, 4.66-4.96) to 31.5 (± 9.19, 29.5-33.6), 423 (± 49.3, 412-434), 6.78 (± 0.80, 6.60-6.98), and 4.74 (± 0.64, 4.59-4.88), respectively, but remained stable in groups 2 (n = 23) and 3 (n = 24). Significant relationships (p < 0.01) were uncovered between postop CDVA and preop values of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC. Multilinear regression revealed significant correlations between CDVA at 1 year and preop COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC (r2 = 0.533, r20-2ant = 0.126, r2TCT = 0.321, r2ARC = 0.506, r2PRC = 0.467). Including preop CDVA further enhanced this correlation (r2 = 0.637, r2LogMAR CDVApreop = 0.566).

Conclusion: CXL improved CDVA, increased COD and ARC, and reduced TCT and PRC. The chance of correctly estimating the CDVA at 1 year after CXL using preoperative markers of COD, TCT, ARC, and PRC is 53%, improving to 64% with the inclusion of preoperative CDVA. Objective measurements taken at the preoperative screening stage may be useful to estimate the likely postoperative CDVA when preoperative CDVA measures are unreliable or unobtainable.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06522789.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology and Therapy
Ophthalmology and Therapy OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
3.00%
发文量
157
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope Ophthalmology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed (single-blind), and rapid publication journal. The scope of the journal is broad and will consider all scientifically sound research from preclinical, clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the use of ophthalmological therapies, devices, and surgical techniques. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Ophthalmology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of ophthalmic therapies. Open Access All articles published by Ophthalmology and Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Ophthalmology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5250/$6000/£4300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials, and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please follow the link for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Ophthalmology and Therapy''s content is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact christopher.vautrinot@springer.com.
期刊最新文献
Postoperative Pain Comparison Between Alcohol-Assisted and Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy Using Nepafenac Treatment: A Novel Study. Correction: Observational Clinical Investigation Evaluating an Ophthalmic Solution Containing Xanthan Gum and Low Concentration Desonide Phosphate in Dry Eye Disease Treatment. Observational Clinical Investigation Evaluating an Ophthalmic Solution Containing Xanthan Gum and Low Concentration Desonide Phosphate in Dry Eye Disease Treatment. Economic Assessment in Resource-Constrained Systems: Individual-Level Simulation Model in Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Oedema. Could Automated Objective Measurements Acquired at the Preoperative Stage Estimate the Corrected Distance Visual Acuity after Corneal Cross-Linking in Keratoconus?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1