Corneal cross-linking in keratoconus using the standard and rapid treatment protocol: differences in demarcation line and 12-month outcomes.

PURPOSE To compare the occurrence rate and depth of the demarcation line and topographical outcome after corneal cross-linking (CXL) for keratoconus using two different treatment protocols. METHODS A retrospective analysis of 131 eyes with progressive keratoconus treated with CXL using riboflavin and UV-A was performed. Eyes were treated either with the standard Dresden protocol (30 minutes irradiation, 3 mW/cm(2), UV-XTM 1000) or a rapid protocol (10 minutes irradiation, 9 mW/cm(2), UV-XTM 2000). The presence and depth of the corneal demarcation line was assessed with an anterior segment optical coherence tomography device 1 month after CXL by a masked observer. Corneal topography and tomography was performed at baseline and at 12-month follow-up with Pentacam and the TMS (Topographic Modeling System) device. RESULTS In the standard protocol group, 76.5% (62/81) of treated corneas revealed a demarcation line 1 month after CXL, whereas such a demarcation line was observed in only 22% (11/50) of eyes treated with the rapid protocol (P < 0.0001). The demarcation line was significantly more superficial in the rapid protocol group (P = 0.004). Corneal topography values between baseline and 12 months after CXL showed a mean change of -0.76 diopters (D) in Kmax (SD ± 2.7) in the standard protocol group versus a mean change of +0.72 D in Kmax (SD ± 1.5) in the rapid protocol (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS The rapid CXL protocol negatively influences the occurrence and depth of the demarcation line 1 month after CXL. Our results show a negative effect on the topographical outcome 1 year after CXL.

Corneal Cross-Linking in a 4-Year-Old Child With Keratoconus and Down Syndrome

PURPOSE To describe the clinical outcome of corneal cross-linking (CXL) in a young child with keratoconus. METHODS This is a case report of a young girl with keratoconus with ophthalmologic findings and 3-year follow-up. Follow-up visits included visual acuity measurement, retinoscopy, corneal tomography, and topography. RESULTS A girl with Down syndrome was diagnosed with bilateral keratoconus and relative amblyopia at the age of 4 years. The best-corrected near visual acuity was 20/100 binocularly. Corneal tomography showed the following parameters: OD K(max) 47.2 diopters (D), thinnest location 442 μm; OS K(max) 49.6 D, thinnest location 432 μm. Three months later, the keratoconus in the left eye progressed (K(max) 50.2 D, thinnest location 424 μm), and CXL was performed. One year later, CXL was necessary also in the right eye because of progression. The girl was most recently reexamined at the age of 7 years. The corrected near visual acuity was 20/80 in both eyes. The corneal curvature slightly flattened, and the corneal thickness stabilized (OD K(max) 46.8 D, thinnest location 389 μm; OS K(max) 49.4 D, thinnest location 360 μm). CONCLUSIONS Onset of keratoconus can occur in early childhood, especially in patients with Down syndrome. In this case, CXL was performed at 4 and 5 years of age without complications and stopped further keratoconus progression.

Reduced foveal vision enhances peripheral monitoring and peripheral event detection

Introduction: Although it seems plausible that sports performance relies on high-acuity foveal vision, it could be empirically shown that myoptic blur (up to +2 diopters) does not harm performance in sport tasks that require foveal information pick-up like golf putting (Bulson, Ciuffreda, & Hung, 2008). How myoptic blur affects peripheral performance is yet unknown. Attention might be less needed for processing visual cues foveally and lead to better performance because peripheral cues are better processed as a function of reduced foveal vision, which will be tested in the current experiment. Methods: 18 sport science students with self-reported myopia volunteered as participants, all of them regularly wearing contact lenses. Exclusion criteria comprised visual correction other than myopic, correction of astigmatism and use of contact lenses out of Swiss delivery area. For each of the participants, three pairs of additional contact lenses (besides their regular lenses; used in the “plano” condition) were manufactured with an individual overcorrection to a retinal defocus of +1 to +3 diopters (referred to as “+1.00 D”, “+2.00 D”, and “+3.00 D” condition, respectively). Gaze data were acquired while participants had to perform a multiple object tracking (MOT) task that required to track 4 out of 10 moving stimuli. In addition, in 66.7 % of all trials, one of the 4 targets suddenly stopped during the motion phase for a period of 0.5 s. Stimuli moved in front of a picture of a sports hall to allow for foveal processing. Due to the directional hypotheses, the level of significance for one-tailed tests on differences was set at α = .05 and posteriori effect sizes were computed as partial eta squares (ηρ2). Results: Due to problems with the gaze-data collection, 3 participants had to be excluded from further analyses. The expectation of a centroid strategy was confirmed because gaze was closer to the centroid than the target (all p < .01). In comparison to the plano baseline, participants more often recalled all 4 targets under defocus conditions, F(1,14) = 26.13, p < .01, ηρ2 = .65. The three defocus conditions differed significantly, F(2,28) = 2.56, p = .05, ηρ2 = .16, with a higher accuracy as a function of a defocus increase and significant contrasts between conditions +1.00 D and +2.00 D (p = .03) and +1.00 D and +3.00 D (p = .03). For stop trials, significant differences could neither be found between plano baseline and defocus conditions, F(1,14) = .19, p = .67, ηρ2 = .01, nor between the three defocus conditions, F(2,28) = 1.09, p = .18, ηρ2 = .07. Participants reacted faster in “4 correct+button” trials under defocus than under plano-baseline conditions, F(1,14) = 10.77, p < .01, ηρ2 = .44. The defocus conditions differed significantly, F(2,28) = 6.16, p < .01, ηρ2 = .31, with shorter response times as a function of a defocus increase and significant contrasts between +1.00 D and +2.00 D (p = .01) and +1.00 D and +3.00 D (p < .01). Discussion: The results show that gaze behaviour in MOT is not affected to a relevant degree by a visual overcorrection up to +3 diopters. Hence, it can be taken for granted that peripheral event detection was investigated in the present study. This overcorrection, however, does not harm the capability to peripherally track objects. Moreover, if an event has to be detected peripherally, neither response accuracy nor response time is negatively affected. Findings could claim considerable relevance for all sport situations in which peripheral vision is required which now needs applied studies on this topic. References: Bulson, R. C., Ciuffreda, K. J., & Hung, G. K. (2008). The effect of retinal defocus on golf putting. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 28, 334-344.