Outcomes of Corneal Collagen Crosslinking in Pseudophakic Bullous Keratopathy

Cornea (Impact Factor: 2.04). 01/2014; 33(3). DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000004
Source: PubMed


The aim was to evaluate the outcomes of corneal collagen crosslinking (CXL) in symptomatic pseudophakic bullous keratopathy (PBK).
In a retrospective noncomparative, interventional case series, we reviewed the records of 50 eyes (50 patients) with symptomatic PBK who underwent CXL. Central corneal thickness (CCT), pain score, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and corneal transparency were recorded at baseline; at day 7, day 15; and 1, 3, and 6 months after the CXL.
The mean pain score decreased from 8.1 ± 0.6 at presentation to 2.1 ± 0.7 on day 7 (P = 0.0001). A subsequent regression was seen in pain scores over 6 months (5.3 ± 1.5). The mean CCT decreased from a preoperative value of 724.8 ± 78.4 to 694.9 ± 77.9 μm by the end of the first month (P = 0.0001). The CCT remained stable at subsequent follow-up. The BCVA improved from logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (log MAR) 2.0 ± 0.5 preoperatively to log MAR 1.8 ± 0.5 by the end of the first month (P = 0.001). The subsequent follow-up showed a progressive deterioration in the BCVA to the preoperative levels at 6 months. Corneal bullae recurred in 44% (22 eyes) at 6 months after an initial disappearance. A significant improvement in the BCVA and a lack of recurrence of bullae were significantly associated with a thinner CCT on presentation.
CXL in symptomatic PBK temporarily improves pain without providing long-term improvement in the BCVA. Case selection is important with more effect seen in patients with a thinner CCT at presentation.

1 Follower
26 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Corneal transplantation remains the gold-standard treatment for bullous keratopathy patients as it provides symptomatic relief and visual rehabilitation. As corneas are not always available for transplant, alternative treatments have to be considered for alleviation of discomfort and pain. Various treatment options available in such cases include conjunctival flaps, anterior stromal puncture, amniotic membrane transplantation, phototherapeutic keratectomy, bandage contact lenses, and hypertonic saline eye drops. A combination of the above treatments can be employed depending upon the severity of bullous keratopathy and co-existing corneal edema. New potential treatments include collagen cross-linking (CXL), cultured endothelial cell injection, and topical treatment with Rho-associated kinase (ROCK) inhibitor. There is a lack of clinical trials comparing the safety and efficacy of the currently available treatment options for the management of bullous keratopathy. The effect of these treatments on subsequent corneal transplant has not been observed. CXL seems to offer short-term benefit for relief of pain. Newer potential treatment modalities such as ROCK inhibitors are claimed to be useful for the reversal of early edema associated with corneal endothelial dysfunction; however, long-term clinical trials are awaited.
    Current opinion in ophthalmology 05/2014; 25(4). DOI:10.1097/ICU.0000000000000062 · 2.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Four eyes of 2 patients with corneal edema due to Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy were treated with CXL using the standard protocol. Since no improvement in visual acuity, corneal clarity, thickness, or pain sensation was evident in any eye at month 12, 2 eyes of the 2 patients were retreated, this time, following intraoperative corneal dehydration with glycerol 70% drops. This retreatment also failed to produce any significant effect on vision, corneal clarity, thickness, or pain in either eye. Collagen crosslinking with the current protocols may not be effective in the management of eyes with corneal edema due to Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy. Further studies are required to establish the efficacy of CXL and optimize the technique and/or dehydration method utilized in these cases.
    Case Reports in Medicine 11/2014; 2014:463905. DOI:10.1155/2014/463905
  • Source
    Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery 04/2015; 41(4):842–872. DOI:10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.03.010 · 2.72 Impact Factor