Long-term Evaluation of Corneal Biomechanical Properties After Corneal Cross-linking for Keratoconus: A 4-Year Longitudinal Study.

PURPOSE To compare the long-term changes in corneal biomechanics, topography, and tomography before and 4 years after corneal cross-linking (CXL) with the Dresden protocol and correlate these changes with visual acuity. METHODS In this longitudinal study, 18 eyes of 18 patients with progressive keratoconus who were treated with CXL were included. All patients received a standard ophthalmological examination and were examined by Placido disc-based topography, Scheimpflug tomography, and biomechanical assessments with the Corvis ST (OCULUS Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany) and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY) before and 4 years after CXL. The main outcome measures were dynamic corneal response (DCR) parameters obtained from the Corvis ST, corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), visual acuity, refraction, corneal curvature, and corneal thickness. RESULTS There were no significant differences in mean visual acuity, refraction, intraocular pressure, corneal topography, corneal astigmatism in both corneal surfaces, maximum keratometry, corneal thickness at apical and thinnest points, thickness profile indices, corneal volume, and specular microscopy before and 4 years after CXL (P > .05). Significant changes were observed in many DCR parameters, including radius at highest concavity and integrated inverse radius, both of which were consistent with stiffening. The CH and CRF values after CXL were not statistically significant. The new parameters using the Corvis ST include integrated inverse concave radius, which showed a significant decrease 1.07 ± 0.93 mm-1, consistent with stiffening. The corneal stiffness parameter at the first applanation, Ambrósio's Relational Thickness to the horizontal profile, deformation amplitude ratio, and Corvis Biomechanical Index as a combined biomechanical screening parameter did not show significant changes. CONCLUSIONS CXL is a minimally invasive treatment option to prevent keratoconus progression over 4 years. Pressure-derived biomechanical parameters obtained from the ORA did not show any change following CXL at 4 years of follow-up, whereas the Corvis ST DCR parameters detected changes in corneal biomechanical properties. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(12):849-856.].

[1]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  United States Multicenter Clinical Trial of Corneal Collagen Crosslinking for Keratoconus Treatment. , 2017, Ophthalmology.

[2]  David P Piñero,et al.  New parameters for evaluating corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure after small-incision lenticule extraction by Scheimpflug-based dynamic tonometry. , 2017, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[3]  A. Elsheikh,et al.  Consideration of corneal biomechanics in the diagnosis and management of keratoconus: is it important? , 2016, Eye and Vision.

[4]  M. Lanza,et al.  Long-term results of corneal collagen crosslinking for progressive keratoconus. , 2015, Journal of optometry.

[5]  H. Hatami-Marbini,et al.  Collagen cross-linking treatment effects on corneal dynamic biomechanical properties. , 2015, Experimental eye research.

[6]  M. Bagheri,et al.  Changes in Corneal Topography and Biomechanical Properties after Collagen Cross Linking for Keratoconus: 1-Year Results , 2015, Middle East African journal of ophthalmology.

[7]  C. Jayadev,et al.  Cone location-dependent outcomes after combined topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy and collagen cross-linking. , 2015, American journal of ophthalmology.

[8]  D. Patel,et al.  Biomechanical properties of the keratoconic cornea: a review , 2015, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[9]  F. Raiskup,et al.  Corneal collagen crosslinking with riboflavin and ultraviolet‐A light in progressive keratoconus: Ten‐year results , 2015, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[10]  G. Richard,et al.  Corneal Biomechanical Changes after Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus with the Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology , 2014, Journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  S. Yun,et al.  Biomechanical characterization of keratoconus corneas ex vivo with Brillouin microscopy. , 2014, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[12]  C. Roberts Concepts and misconceptions in corneal biomechanics. , 2014, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[13]  D. Patel,et al.  Biomechanical responses of healthy and keratoconic corneas measured using a noncontact scheimpflug-based tonometer. , 2014, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[14]  Tukezban Huseynova,et al.  Accelerated versus conventional corneal collagen crosslinking , 2014, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[15]  B. Derby,et al.  Biomechanical changes after repeated collagen cross-linking on human corneas assessed in vitro using scanning acoustic microscopy. , 2014, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[16]  I. Avni,et al.  Corneal collagen cross-linking for the treatment of progressive keratoconus: 3-year prospective outcome. , 2014, Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie.

[17]  William J Dupps,et al.  Discriminant value of custom ocular response analyzer waveform derivatives in keratoconus. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[18]  B. Derby,et al.  Biomechanical properties of human corneas following low- and high-intensity collagen cross-linking determined with scanning acoustic microscopy. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[19]  S. Marcos,et al.  Contributing factors to corneal deformation in air puff measurements. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  A. Quantock,et al.  The Effect of Riboflavin/UVA Collagen Cross-linking Therapy on the Structure and Hydrodynamic Behaviour of the Ungulate and Rabbit Corneal Stroma , 2013, PloS one.

[21]  F. Raiskup,et al.  Identification of Biomechanical Properties of the Cornea: The Ocular Response Analyzer , 2012, Current eye research.

[22]  G. Labiris,et al.  Evaluation of corneal hysteresis and corneal resistance factor after corneal cross-linking for keratoconus , 2012, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[23]  S. Sel,et al.  Interlamellar cohesion after corneal crosslinking using riboflavin and ultraviolet A light , 2011, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[24]  Konstantin Kotliar,et al.  Air-pulse corneal applanation signal curve parameters for the characterisation of keratoconus , 2011, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[25]  A. Pérez-Escudero,et al.  Corneal biomechanical changes after collagen cross-linking from porcine eye inflation experiments. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[26]  C. Mazzotta,et al.  Long-term results of riboflavin ultraviolet a corneal collagen cross-linking for keratoconus in Italy: the Siena eye cross study. , 2010, American journal of ophthalmology.

[27]  Tos T. J. M. Berendschot,et al.  Use of anterior segment optical coherence tomography to study corneal changes after collagen cross-linking. , 2009, American journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  P. Vinciguerra,et al.  Intraoperative and postoperative effects of corneal collagen cross-linking on progressive keratoconus. , 2009, Archives of ophthalmology.

[29]  Dilraj S. Grewal,et al.  Corneal collagen crosslinking using riboflavin and ultraviolet‐A light for keratoconus: One‐year analysis using Scheimpflug imaging , 2009, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[30]  Eberhard Spoerl,et al.  Collagen crosslinking with riboflavin and ultraviolet‐A light in keratoconus: Long‐term results , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[31]  A. Elsheikh,et al.  Assessment of Corneal Biomechanical Properties and Their Variation with Age , 2007, Current eye research.

[32]  Theo Seiler,et al.  Increased resistance of crosslinked cornea against enzymatic digestion , 2004, Current eye research.