Abstract
Objective Comparing definitions of progression in keratoconus (KC) patients after corneal cross-linking (CXL).
Methods Retrospective case series of KC eyes underwent CXL. Keratoconus progression after CXL treatment was defined based on either the widely accepted standard criteria (i.e., maximum keratometry (Kmax), increase >1 Diopter (D) or thinnest corneal thickness (ThCT) reduction >20 mm) or the ABCD progression criteria.
Results Thirty-seven KC eyes underwent CXL. Kmax showed a significant reduction from baseline values after CXL (p<0.01), while no difference in ThCT (p=0.12) and in CDVA (p=0.1) was found. Applying standard criteria for progression 18.9% (7/37) of eyes were classified as progressed and 43.2% (16/37) according to the ABCD method.
Conclusions Different definition of progression leads to increased misclassification, there is a need of a shared protocol to assess the effectiveness of CXL.
