English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Purpose  To compare the efficacy of implanting a single Keraring segment according to a novel Q‐value‐based nomogram (QN) to that of segment implantation according to the manufacturer's standard nomogram (SN), for keratoconus treatment.    Methods  This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial of 104 patients (104 eyes) with Amsler‐Krumeich grade 1 or 2 keratoconus, and type 1 or 2 cone asymmetry determined according to manufacturer's classification. They were randomly distributed into two groups: group A patients ( n  = 52) underwent Keraring implantation according to the SN, and group B patients ( n  = 52) underwent implantation of a single (210° arc‐length) Keraring segment according to the QN. Both treatments were combined with accelerated transepithelial cross‐linking, and follow‐up was 6 months. Main outcome measures were preoperative and postoperative visual acuity, subjective refraction and corneal topography.    Results  At postoperative month 6, group B exhibited statistically significantly higher values of mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), sphere, K2, K‐average, K‐max and Q‐anterior (p = 0.02, 0.01, 0.002, 0.001, 0.0001 and 0.03, respectively) compared to that of group A. However, group A exhibited better refractive cylindrical improvements (p = 0.04). In group A, we documented spontaneous extrusion of one Keraring segment.    Conclusion  Single 210° arc‐length segment implantation using our objective QN was more efficacious for keratoconus treatment than using the subjective SN. The nomograms were comparable when the Q‐anterior value was >−1.00; however, the QN was superior to the SN when the Q‐anterior value was ≤−1.00. The QN yielded greater postoperative UDVA and smoother corneal remodelling than did the SN for treatment of grade 1 and 2 keratoconic eyes.

acta ophthalmologica

A novel Q‐value‐based nomogram for single intracorneal ring segment implantation versus standard manufacturer's nomogram combined with accelerated cross‐linking for treatment of keratoconus: a randomized controlled trial