Aims To evaluate the rates of keratoconus progression and associated factors in eyes of children and adolescents.
Methods Retrospective, cohort study of individuals ≤18 years old at the time of keratoconus diagnosis and with at least 6 months of follow-up. Corneal tomography was performed using an Orbscan tomographer (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, New York, USA) to determine whether progression occurred. Tomographic progression of keratoconus was defined as a change in any of the investigated parameters (keratometry values, KMAX, maximum anterior or posterior elevation, central pachymetry, thinnest pachymetry) beyond the limits of repeatability.
Results 148 eyes of 106 patients with a mean age of 15.2±2.5 years were studied over a mean follow-up period of 2.9±2.2 years. The overall rate of tomographic progression was 77.0% (114/148 eyes). Eyes that progressed had more advanced disease at presentation with higher anterior curvature (KMAX55.4±6.3 vs 52.2±5.4 dioptres; p<0.01), posterior elevation (108.2±40.9 vs 86.3±35.6 µm; p<0.01) and lower central pachymetry measurements (442.1±56.7 vs 454.4±47.5 µm; p=0.01). Age at presentation, gender, atopy, documented eye rubbing, ethnicity and duration of follow-up were not significantly associated with progression in the multivariate analyses. There was a higher rate of bilateral progression if at least one eye had severe keratoconus (73.9%) compared with no severe keratoconus in either eye (36.8%; p=0.03).
Conclusions A high rate of progression was identified in keratoconic eyes of children and adolescents. More advanced disease at initial presentation may increase the risk of further keratoconus progression.
- treatment surgery
Data availability statement
No data are available. Data sharing approval has not been obtained from the ethics committee.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Presented at This study was presented, in part, as an abstract at the Asia Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Congress, March 2019
Contributors Study design (JJM), data acquisition (JJM, AG, HRV), analysis (JJM, AG), interpretation of data (all), manuscript draft (JJM), critical revision of manuscript (all), final approval of the version to be published (all), agreement to be accountable for the work (all).
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.