Karen E Asfar, Yara Bteich, Anthony Abou Mrad, Jad F Assaf, Soosan Jacob, Farhad Hafezi, Shady T Awwad
{"title":"Corneal Allogenic Intrastromal Ring Segments (CAIRS) Versus Synthetic Segments: A Single Segment Comparative Analysis Using Propensity Score Matching.","authors":"Karen E Asfar, Yara Bteich, Anthony Abou Mrad, Jad F Assaf, Soosan Jacob, Farhad Hafezi, Shady T Awwad","doi":"10.3928/1081597X-20241002-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare and assess the visual, refractive, and tomographic results of patients with corneal ectasia treated with either corneal allogenic intrastromal ring segments (CAIRS) or synthetic intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) without concomitant corneal cross-linking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort study, 34 eyes with CAIRS were matched to 34 eyes with ICRS using the propensity score matching technique. Each group was matched on a oneto-one basis using multiple parameters such as central corneal thickness, vertical and horizontal coma, maximum anterior keratometry, steepest keratometry, and age. Visual, refractive, topographic, and aberrometric data were measured at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Initial preoperative parameters were similar between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement at last follow-up time in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (0.52 ± 0.23 to 0.16 ± 0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR], <i>P</i> < .001; 0.44 ± 0.27 to 0.17 ± 0.21 logMAR, <i>P</i> < .001), topographic astigmatism (4.45 ± 2.75 to 3.14 ± 1.93 diopters [D], <i>P</i> = .001; 3.66 ± 2.22 to 2.36 ± 1.46 D, <i>P</i> = .007), maximum anterior keratometry (55.85 ± 7.53 to 50.69 ± 6.38 D, <i>P</i> < .001; 54.59 ± 6.95 to 50.71 ± 4.51 D, <i>P</i> = .003), and vertical coma (1.49 ± 1.02 to 0.38 ± 0.65 D, <i>P</i> < .001; 1.22 ± 0.75 to 0.52 ± 0.57 D, <i>P</i> < .001) for CAIRS and ICRS, respectively. The improvements observed in both groups at the last follow-up visit were comparable; however, the CAIRS group demonstrated a higher percentage of eyes gaining two or more Snellen lines of CDVA (60% vs 31.58%, <i>P</i> = .04), and a greater magnitude of reduction in vertical coma compared to the ICRS group, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. No major complications were observed with both groups, and one eye lost one CDVA line in the ICRS group. The mean thickness of the CAIRS segments at the last follow-up visit was 401.06 ± 100.12 µm, compared to 435.29 ± 26.19 µm for ICRS. Both CAIRS and ICRS demonstrated significant compression of stromal thickness above the segment (36.19% and 32.00%, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When adequately matched for preoperative disease type and severity, eyes with CAIRS had a similar and notable clinical improvement compared to ICRS, with possibly better improvement in vertical coma and CDVA. <b>[<i>J Refract Surg</i>. 2024;40(11):e863-e876.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":16951,"journal":{"name":"Journal of refractive surgery","volume":"40 11","pages":"e863-e876"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20241002-02","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare and assess the visual, refractive, and tomographic results of patients with corneal ectasia treated with either corneal allogenic intrastromal ring segments (CAIRS) or synthetic intrastromal corneal ring segments (ICRS) without concomitant corneal cross-linking.
Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 34 eyes with CAIRS were matched to 34 eyes with ICRS using the propensity score matching technique. Each group was matched on a oneto-one basis using multiple parameters such as central corneal thickness, vertical and horizontal coma, maximum anterior keratometry, steepest keratometry, and age. Visual, refractive, topographic, and aberrometric data were measured at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year postoperatively.
Results: Initial preoperative parameters were similar between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement at last follow-up time in corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (0.52 ± 0.23 to 0.16 ± 0.18 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR], P < .001; 0.44 ± 0.27 to 0.17 ± 0.21 logMAR, P < .001), topographic astigmatism (4.45 ± 2.75 to 3.14 ± 1.93 diopters [D], P = .001; 3.66 ± 2.22 to 2.36 ± 1.46 D, P = .007), maximum anterior keratometry (55.85 ± 7.53 to 50.69 ± 6.38 D, P < .001; 54.59 ± 6.95 to 50.71 ± 4.51 D, P = .003), and vertical coma (1.49 ± 1.02 to 0.38 ± 0.65 D, P < .001; 1.22 ± 0.75 to 0.52 ± 0.57 D, P < .001) for CAIRS and ICRS, respectively. The improvements observed in both groups at the last follow-up visit were comparable; however, the CAIRS group demonstrated a higher percentage of eyes gaining two or more Snellen lines of CDVA (60% vs 31.58%, P = .04), and a greater magnitude of reduction in vertical coma compared to the ICRS group, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. No major complications were observed with both groups, and one eye lost one CDVA line in the ICRS group. The mean thickness of the CAIRS segments at the last follow-up visit was 401.06 ± 100.12 µm, compared to 435.29 ± 26.19 µm for ICRS. Both CAIRS and ICRS demonstrated significant compression of stromal thickness above the segment (36.19% and 32.00%, respectively).
Conclusions: When adequately matched for preoperative disease type and severity, eyes with CAIRS had a similar and notable clinical improvement compared to ICRS, with possibly better improvement in vertical coma and CDVA. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(11):e863-e876.].
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Refractive Surgery, the official journal of the International Society of Refractive Surgery, a partner of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, has been a monthly peer-reviewed forum for original research, review, and evaluation of refractive and lens-based surgical procedures for more than 30 years. Practical, clinically valuable articles provide readers with the most up-to-date information regarding advances in the field of refractive surgery. Begin to explore the Journal and all of its great benefits such as:
• Columns including “Translational Science,” “Surgical Techniques,” and “Biomechanics”
• Supplemental videos and materials available for many articles
• Access to current articles, as well as several years of archived content
• Articles posted online just 2 months after acceptance.