COMPARISON OF 3-YEAR RESULTS AFTER THE STANDARD CXL VERSUS THE ACCELERATED CXL PROCEDURES IN LATVIA.

The objective of this study is to determine if there is a significant difference in keratometry and pachymetry between patient groups treated using the standard CXL (Dresden protocol) and the accelerated CXL (9 mW/cm² for 10 minutes).

Dr. Solomatin Eye center

This retrospective and analytical study included 24 eyes of 24 patients who underwent the standard CLX procedure and 19 eyes of 19 patients who underwent the accelerated CXL procedure. Data about keratometry and pachymetry were obtained from outpatient medical records. All data were described as medians. The study compared preoperative data with outcomes at the 1st and 3rd years within each group and the difference of data distribution between both patient groups.

The study didn’t reveal statistically significant difference in distribution of mean keratometry (p=0,517 at year1, p=0,282 at year 3), cylinder (p=0,486 at year 1, p=0,903 at year 3), pachymetry (p=0,651 at year 1, p=0,328 at year 3) between standard CXL and accelerated CXL groups. However, there were statistically significant results comparing the median of differences between preoperative and postoperative results in the standard CXL group for keratometry (p=0,005 at year 1, p=0,002 at year 3) and for pachymetry (p=0,002, p=0,009 at year 3). The median of differences between preoperative and postoperative results in the accelerated CXL  group appeared not to be statistically significant.

The study didn’t show any significant difference in 3-year outcomes between the standard CXL and the accelerated CXL (9 mW/cm² for 10 minutes) groups. Therefore, both methods showed long- term stabilization of cornea, which was approved by decrease in postoperative mean keratometry values in both groups. Moreover, when comparing changes in pachymetry over the 3-year period, the study revealed more significant corneal thinning in the standard CXL group compared to the accelerated CXL group.