Evaluating the Effectiveness of Accelerated and Accelerated Cornea Pulsing Crosslinking Based on the Presence of a Demarcation Line

Purpose of the study is to assess the state of the demarcation line of the stroma after accelerated and pulsed accelerated ultraviolet cornea crosslinking. Patients and methods. Clinical observations included 24 patients (31 eyes) with keratoconus (KC), aged 18–46 years, men — 11 (45.9 %), women — 13 (54.1 %). Accelerated (a-CXL) crosslinking was carried out in continuous mode with a power of 18 mW/cm2 for 5 minutes (13 eyes), pulsed accelerated (i-ACXL) with a power of 18 mW/cm2 for 10 minutes, in mode 1 sec light / 1 sec pause (18 eyes). Conducted generally accepted and additional methods of ophthalmic research. The follow-up periods were 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Results. According to optical coherent tomography, the demarcation line was detected in all cases after a-CXL and i-ACXL. At 1 month after the crosslinking, there were no significant differences between the a-CXL and i-ACXL groups in terms of uncorrected visual acuity, corrected visual acuity, maximal correction. The average depth with demarcation at 1 month after the procedure in the central zone of the cornea was 216.41 ± 36.67 μm in the a-CXL group and 236.41 ± 37.08 μm in the i-ACXL group. Using confocal microscopy in vivo in both groups 1 month after surgery apoptosis of keratocytes and stromal edema were detected. A gradual restoration of the cornea to its original state was observed after 6 months. Conclusion. Research results have shown that accelerated and pulsed accelerated cross-linking are safe and effective technologies to stabilize the progression of keratoconus. Both crosslinking protocols provide a significant reduction in the duration of the procedure compared to the traditional one. Revealed deeper arrangement of the demarcation line when performing pulsed accelerated crosslinking compared to the accelerated. Further long-term and more extensive studies of accelerated and pulsed accelerated cornea ultraviolet crosslinking will provide improved information on their effectiveness in the long-term.

1. Avetisov S.E. Keratoconus: modern approaches to the study of pathogenesis, diagnosis, correction and treatment. Annals of Ophthalmology = Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2014;130(6):37–43 (in Russ.).

2. Bikbov M.M., Halimov A.R. The effect of ultraviolet cross-linking on corneal biomechanics. Russian journal of biomechanics = Rossijskij-zhurnal-biomekhaniki. 2018;22(2):148-153 (in Russ.).

3. Bikbov M.M., Surkova V.K. Cornealcollagen crosslinking for keratoconus. A review. Ophthalmology in Russia = Oftal’mologiya. 2014;11(3):13–18 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18008/1816-5095-2014-3-13-19

4. Bikbov M.M., Bikbova G.M., Khabibullin A.F. Corneal collagen cross-linking in keratoconus management. Annals of Ophthalmology = Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2011;127(5):21–25 (In Russ.).

5. Bikbova G., Khalimov A., Kazakbaeva G., Bikbov M. Molecular mechanisms of corneal collagen crosslinking. Invest. Ophth. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):522.

6. Bikbov M.M., Khalimov A.R., Usubov E.L. Ultraviolet Corneal Crosslinking. Annals of Russian academy of medical sciences = Vestnik Rossiyskoy akademii meditsinskikh nauk. 2016;71(3):224–232 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.15690/vramn562

7. Bikbov M., Bikbova G., Surkova V., Zainullina N., Gumerova S. Morphological changes in cornea after corneal collagen cross-linking as keratoconus treatment. Cataract and refractive surgery = Kataraktal’naya i refraktsionnaya khirurgiya. 2014;14(3):18–22 (In Russ.).

8. Bikbov M.M., Bikbova G.M. Corneal ectasia. M: Oftalmologija; 2011:86–87 (In Russ.).

9. Bikbova G., Bikbov M. Standard corneal collagen crosslinking versus transepithelial iontophoresis-assisted corneal crosslinking, 24 months follow-up: randomized control trial. Acta Ophthalmol. 2016;94(7):e600–e606. DOI: 10.1111/aos

10. Kohlhaas M., Spoerl E., Schilde T., Unger G., Wittig C., Pillunat L.E. Biomechanical evidence of the distribution of cross‑links in corneas treated with riboflavin and ultraviolet A light. J. Cataract. Refract. Surg. 2006;(32):279–283. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.12.092

11. Lombardo M., Giannini D., Lombardo G., Serrao S. Randomized controlled trial comparing transepithelial corneal cross-linking using iontophoresis with the Dresden protocol in progressive keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 2017;124(6):804–812. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.01.040. Epub 2017 Mar 7.

12. Ku J.Y., Niederer R.L., Patel D.V., Sherwin T., Mcghee C.N. Laser scanning in vivo confocal analysis of keratocyte density in keratoconus. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:845–850. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.04.067

13. Bikbova G.M., Bikbov M.M. Standard corneal collagen crosslinking versus transepithelial iontophoresis-assisted corneal crosslinking, 24 months follow-up: Randomized control trial. Acta Ophthalmologica 94(7) April 2016. DOI: 10.1111/aos.13032

14. Bikbova G., Bikbov M. Transepithelial corneal collagen cross-linking by iontophoresis of riboflavin. Acta Ophthalmol. 2014;92(1):e30–e34. DOI: 10.1111/aos.12235

15. Messmer E.M., Meyer P., Herwig M.C., Loeffler K.U., Schirra F., Seitz B., Thiel M., Reinhard T., Kampik A., Auw‑Haedrich C. Morphological and immunohistochemical changes after corneal cross‑linking. Cornea. 2013;(32):111–117. DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31824d701b

16. Mazzotta C., Traversi C., Paradiso A.L., Latronico M.E., Rechichi M. Pulsed light accelerated crosslinking versus continuous light accelerated crosslinking: One‑year results. J Ophthalmol. 2014:604731. DOI: 10.1155/2014/604731

17.