Corneal collagen crosslinking has revolutionized the treatment of keratoconus and post-refractive corneal ectasia in the past decade. Corneal crosslinking with riboflavin and ultraviolet A is proposed to halt the progression of keratectasia. In the original "Conventional Dresden Protocol" (C-CXL), the epithelium is removed prior to the crosslinking process to facilitate better absorption of riboflavin into the corneal stroma. Studies analyzing its short- and long-term outcomes revealed that although there are inconsistencies as to the effectiveness of this technique, the advantages prevail over the disadvantages. Therefore, corneal crosslinking (CXL) is widely used in current practice to treat keratoconus. In an attempt to improve the visual and topographical outcomes of C-CXL and to minimize time-related discomfort and endothelial-related side effects, various modifications such as accelerated crosslinking and transepithelial crosslinking methods have been introduced. The comparison of outcomes of these modified techniques with C-CXL has also returned contradictory results. Hence, it is difficult to clearly identify an optimal procedure that can overcome issues associated with the CXL. This review provides an up-to-date analysis on clinical and laboratory findings of these popular crosslinking protocols used in the treatment of keratoconus. It is evident from this review that in general, these modified techniques have succeeded in minimizing the immediate complications of the C-CXL technique. However, there were contradictory viewpoints regarding their effectiveness when compared with the conventional technique. Therefore, these modified techniques need to be further investigated to arrive at an optimal treatment option for keratoconus.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2018.
All research outputs
#21,158,537
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#915
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,752
of 347,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,135 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them
