A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

The Influence of Cone Location and Phenotype on the Risk and Rate of Keratoconus Progression. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: To assess if cone location and phenotype have an impact on the risk of keratoconus progression.

Methods: Retrospective multi-centric cohort study. The baseline visit was used to classify cases according to cone location (based on thinnest pachymetry and maximum keratometry, max) and phenotype. Cases were further labeled as stable or progressive depending on whether they fulfilled criteria for progression throughout the follow-up. Time from baseline to progression was noted. Univariate and multivariate mixed-effects models accounted for correlations between both eyes of the same patient and adjusted for max and age at baseline.

Results: A total of 423 eyes from 250 patients was included, 48.0% ( = 203) labeled as progressive. Based on the location of thinnest pachymetry and max, 72.1% ( = 305) and 60.8% ( = 257) respectively were classified as central. In univariate analysis, there were significant differences between groups ( < 0.001), with central keratoconus more frequently associated with progression. However, after adjusting for max and age at baseline in multivariate analysis, this association lost its statistical significance. Results were similar for cone location based on thinnest pachymetry adjusted for max and age. In univariate analysis, there were significant differences between groups ( < 0.001) in the proportion of each phenotype in the stable and progressive groups, with central "nipple" keratoconus more frequently associated with progression. This was lost after adjusting for max and age in multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed significant differences between phenotypes ( < 0.001), with central nipple cones progressing more rapidly.

Conclusion: Central keratoconus and central "nipple" phenotype are more frequently associated with progression, and at a higher rate, but are not independent predictors for progression beyond keratometry and age.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02713683.2025.2550004DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cone location
12
location phenotype
8
thinnest pachymetry
8
influence cone
4
location
4
phenotype risk
4
risk rate
4
rate keratoconus
4
keratoconus progression
4
progression purpose
4

Similar Publications