Effect of topical atropine on astigmatism

Five-year results of atropine 0.01% efficacy in the myopia control in a European population

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 0.01% atropine eye-drops in controlling myopia progression over 5 years.

METHODS

Experimental, analytical, prospective, randomised and longitudinal study, in 361 right eyes from 361 children randomised into the control group (177 eyes without treatment) and treatment group (184 eyes with 0.01% atropine eye-drops). Children assigned to the treatment group used 0.01% atropine once a day every night and the control group's children did not use any treatment or placebo. All the subjects completed an eye examination every 6 months for the 5 years of follow-up. The examination included subjective and objective refraction with cycloplegia, axial length (AL), keratometry and anterior chamber depth (ACD) to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment. It also included the anterior and posterior pole examination to evaluate the safety of the treatment.

RESULTS

The SE increased -0.63±0.42D in children after 5 years of treatment with 0.01% atropine, while in the control group the increase was -0.92±0.56D. AL increased 0.26±0.28 mm in the treatment group compared with 0.49±0.34 mm in the control group. Atropine 0.01% showed an efficacy of 31.5% and 46.9% in the control of the SE and AL increase, respectively. ACD and keratometry did not have significant changes between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Atropine 0.01% is effective in slowing myopia progression in a European population. There were no side effects after 5 years of 0.01% atropine.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of different doses of atropine for myopic control in children: a meta-analysis

Purpose: To comprehensively reassess the efficacy and safety of different concentrations of atropine for retarding myopia progression and seek the most appropriate therapeutic concentration for clinical practice. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals (VIP) and China National Knowledege Infrastructure (CNKI) from their inception to 23 March 2023, to obtain eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that had atropine in at least one treatment arm and placebo/no intervention in another arm. We evaluated the risk of bias of the RCTs according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration for RCTs and quality of cohort studies by the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale. Weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% confidence interval were calculated for meta-analysis. All data analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3, STATA 12.0 and SPSS 26.0 software. Results: A total of 44 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Weighted mean difference (WMD) were 0.73 diopters (D), 0.65 D, 0.35 D per year in refraction progression (χ 2 = 14.63, I 2 = 86.3%; p < 0.001) and -0.26 mm, -0.37 mm, -0.11 mm per year in axial length progression (χ 2 = 5.80, I 2 = 65.5%; p = 0.06) for high (0.5%-1%), moderate (0.1%-0.25%), and low (0.005%-0.05%) dose atropine groups, respectively. Logarithmic dose‒response correlations were found between atropine and their effect on change of refraction, axial length, accommodation and photopic pupil diameter. Through these curves, we found that atropine with concentrations ≤0.05% atropine resulted in a residual value of accommodation of more than 5 D and an increase in pupil diameter no more than 3 mm. Higher doses of atropine resulted in a higher incidence of adverse effects, of which the incidence of photophobia was dose-dependent (r = 0.477, p = 0.029). Conclusion: Both the efficacy and risk of adverse events for atropine treatment of myopia were mostly dose dependent. Comprehensively considered the myopia control effect and safety of each dose, 0.05% may be the best concentration of atropine to control myopia progression at present, at which myopia is better controlled and the side effects are tolerable. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, CRD42022377705.

Effects of atropine 0.01% on refractive errors in children with myopia

Background

Little is known about changes in astigmatism during atropine treatment. We aimed to explore the effects of atropine 0.01% eye drops on both spherical and cylindrical refractive errors in myopic children.

Methods

Children aged 6-14 years with myopia ≥ -6.00 D and < -0.50 D, and total astigmatism > -2.00 D in at least one eye were enrolled. Subjects were randomised either to receive atropine 0.01% once nightly with single-vision lenses or simply to wear single-vision lenses and were followed up at 3-month intervals. Cycloplegic refraction and axial length were measured. The magnitude and direction of total astigmatism (TA), corneal astigmatism (CA), and residual astigmatism (RA) were evaluated.

Results

Overall, 119 eyes (69 eyes in the atropine group and 50 eyes in the control group) were included in the final analyses after 9 months. Atropine-treated eyes showed significantly less progression of myopia than did control eyes (spherical equivalent: -0.35 ± 0.33 vs. -0.56 ± 0.49 D, p = 0.001; axial length: 0.20 ± 0.19 vs. 0.33 ± 0.19 mm, p < 0.001). Compared with control eyes (-0.04 ± 0.23 D), a significant increase in TA was observed in the atropine-treated eyes (-0.14 ± 0.29 D); this was mainly attributed to the increase in CA (-0.17 ± 0.26 D) rather than the minor decrease in RA (0.02 ± 0.32 D).

Conclusions

Atropine 0.01% was effective in preventing myopia progression, whereas 9 months of atropine treatment resulted in a clinically small, but statistically significant increase in TA in myopic Chinese children.

Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global public health problem, in terms of rates of uncorrected refractive error and significantly, an increased risk of visual impairment due to myopia-related ocular morbidity. Since myopia is usually detected in children before 10 years of age and can progress rapidly, interventions to slow its progression need to be delivered in childhood.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children using network meta-analysis (NMA). To generate a relative ranking of myopia control interventions according to their efficacy. To produce a brief economic commentary, summarising the economic evaluations assessing myopia control interventions in children. To maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE; Embase; and three trials registers. The search date was 26 February 2022.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children aged 18 years or younger. Critical outcomes were progression of myopia (defined as the difference in the change in spherical equivalent refraction (SER, dioptres (D)) and axial length (mm) in the intervention and control groups at one year or longer) and difference in the change in SER and axial length following cessation of treatment ('rebound').  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods. We assessed bias using RoB 2 for parallel RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes: change in SER and axial length at one and two years. Most comparisons were with inactive controls.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 64 studies that randomised 11,617 children, aged 4 to 18 years. Studies were mostly conducted in China or other Asian countries (39 studies, 60.9%) and North America (13 studies, 20.3%). Fifty-seven studies (89%) compared myopia control interventions (multifocal spectacles, peripheral plus spectacles (PPSL), undercorrected single vision spectacles (SVLs), multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCL), orthokeratology, rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGP); or pharmacological interventions (including high- (HDA), moderate- (MDA) and low-dose (LDA) atropine, pirenzipine or 7-methylxanthine) against an inactive control. Study duration was 12 to 36 months. The overall certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Since the networks in the NMA were poorly connected, most estimates versus control were as, or more, imprecise than the corresponding direct estimates. Consequently, we mostly report estimates based on direct (pairwise) comparisons below. At one year, in 38 studies (6525 participants analysed), the median change in SER for controls was -0.65 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (mean difference (MD) 0.90 D, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.18), MDA (MD 0.65 D, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.03), LDA (MD 0.38 D, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.66), pirenzipine (MD 0.32 D, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.49), MFSCL (MD 0.26 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), PPSLs (MD 0.51 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82), and multifocal spectacles (MD 0.14 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21). By contrast, there was little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) or undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.15 D, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00) reduce progression.  At two years, in 26 studies (4949 participants), the median change in SER for controls was -1.02 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (MD 1.26 D, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36), MDA (MD 0.45 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83), LDA (MD 0.24 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.31), pirenzipine (MD 0.41 D, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.69), MFSCL (MD 0.30 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41), and multifocal spectacles  (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30). PPSLs (MD 0.34 D, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.76) may also reduce progression, but the results were inconsistent. For RGP, one study found a benefit and another found no difference with control. We found no difference in SER change for undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09). At one year, in 36 studies (6263 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.31 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.30), MDA (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.17), LDA (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.05), orthokeratology (MD -0.19 mm, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.15), MFSCL (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.09), pirenzipine (MD -0.10 mm, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02), PPSLs (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.03), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04). We found little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) or undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.05 mm, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) reduce axial length. At two years, in 21 studies (4169 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.56 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.47mm, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.34), MDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.20), orthokeratology (MD -0.28 mm, (95% CI -0.38 to -0.19), LDA (MD -0.16 mm, 95% CI -0.20 to  -0.12), MFSCL (MD -0.15 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.12), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.03). PPSL may reduce progression (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.05) but results were inconsistent. We found little or no evidence that undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.03) or RGP (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12) reduce axial length. There was inconclusive evidence on whether treatment cessation increases myopia progression. Adverse events and treatment adherence were not consistently reported, and only one study reported quality of life. No studies reported environmental interventions reporting progression in children with myopia, and no economic evaluations assessed interventions for myopia control in children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies mostly compared pharmacological and optical treatments to slow the progression of myopia with an inactive comparator. Effects at one year provided evidence that these interventions may slow refractive change and reduce axial elongation, although results were often heterogeneous. A smaller body of evidence is available at two or three years, and uncertainty remains about the sustained effect of these interventions. Longer-term and better-quality studies comparing myopia control interventions used alone or in combination are needed, and improved methods for monitoring and reporting adverse effects.

Effect of 0.02% and 0.01% atropine on astigmatism: a two-year clinical trial

Background

To evaluate the effects of 0.02% and 0.01% atropine eye drops on ocular and corneal astigmatism over 2 years.

Methods

A prospective clinic-controlled trail. The cohort study assessed 400 myopic children and divided them into three groups: 138 and 142 children were randomized to use either 0.02% or 0.01% atropine eye drops, respectively. They wore single-vision (SV) spectacles, with one drop of atropine applied to both eyes once nightly. Control children (n = 120) only wore SV spectacles. Spherical equivalent refractive errors (SER) and corneal curvature were measured every 4 months. The SER and corneal curvature were assessed by cycloplegic autorefraction and IOLMaster. Ocular and corneal astigmatism were calculated by Thibos vector analysis and then split into its power vector components, J0 (with-the-rule astigmatism) and J45 (oblique).

Results

After 2 years, the ocular astigmatism increased by -0.38 ± 0.29 D, -0.47 ± 0.38 D, -0.41 ± 0.35 D in the 0.02%, 0.01% atropine groups and control group, respectively (p = 0.15). The corresponding corneal astigmatism increased by -0.20 ± 0.34 D, -0.28 ± 0.35 D and -0.26 ± 0.26 D (p = 0.18). The ocular astigmatism J0 increased by 0.19 ± 0.28 D, 0.22 ± 0.36 D, 0.18 ± 0.31 D in the 0.02% atropine, 0.01% atropine and control groups, respectively (p = 0.65). The corresponding corneal astigmatism J0 increased by -0.05 ± 0.34 D, -0.11 ± 0.37 D and -0.13 ± 0.30 D (p = 0.23). There was a small but significant increase in ocular astigmatism (including J0) (all P < 0.05), but there were no changes in the ocular astigmatism J45 and corneal astigmatism (including J0 and J45) in the three groups over time (all p > 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the changes in ocular astigmatism (including J0) among the three groups.

Conclusions

Treatment with 0.02% and 0.01% atropine had no clinically significant effect on ocular and corneal astigmatism over 2 years.

Trial registration

The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, ChiCTR-IPD-16008844. Registered 14/07/2016.

Interventions to slow progression of myopia in children

BACKGROUND

Nearsightedness (myopia) causes blurry vision when one is looking at distant objects. Interventions to slow the progression of myopia in children include multifocal spectacles, contact lenses, and pharmaceutical agents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions, including spectacles, contact lenses, and pharmaceutical agents in slowing myopia progression in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; the LILACS Database; and two trial registrations up to February 2018. A top up search was done in February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We excluded studies when most participants were older than 18 years at baseline. We also excluded studies when participants had less than -0.25 diopters (D) spherical equivalent myopia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies (6772 participants). Twenty-one studies contributed data to at least one meta-analysis. Interventions included spectacles, contact lenses, pharmaceutical agents, and combination treatments. Most studies were conducted in Asia or in the United States. Except one, all studies included children 18 years or younger. Many studies were at high risk of performance and attrition bias. Spectacle lenses: undercorrection of myopia increased myopia progression slightly in two studies; children whose vision was undercorrected progressed on average -0.15 D (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.29 to 0.00; n = 142; low-certainty evidence) more than those wearing fully corrected single vision lenses (SVLs). In one study, axial length increased 0.05 mm (95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) more in the undercorrected group than in the fully corrected group (n = 94; low-certainty evidence). Multifocal lenses (bifocal spectacles or progressive addition lenses) yielded small effect in slowing myopia progression; children wearing multifocal lenses progressed on average 0.14 D (95% CI 0.08 to 0.21; n = 1463; moderate-certainty evidence) less than children wearing SVLs. In four studies, axial elongation was less for multifocal lens wearers than for SVL wearers (-0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04; n = 896; moderate-certainty evidence). Three studies evaluating different peripheral plus spectacle lenses versus SVLs reported inconsistent results for refractive error and axial length outcomes (n = 597; low-certainty evidence). Contact lenses: there may be little or no difference between vision of children wearing bifocal soft contact lenses (SCLs) and children wearing single vision SCLs (mean difference (MD) 0.20D, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.47; n = 300; low-certainty evidence). Axial elongation was less for bifocal SCL wearers than for single vision SCL wearers (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.08; n = 300; low-certainty evidence). Two studies investigating rigid gas permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) showed inconsistent results in myopia progression; these two studies also found no evidence of difference in axial elongation (MD 0.02mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10; n = 415; very low-certainty evidence). Orthokeratology contact lenses were more effective than SVLs in slowing axial elongation (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.19; n = 106; moderate-certainty evidence). Two studies comparing spherical aberration SCLs with single vision SCLs reported no difference in myopia progression nor in axial length (n = 209; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical agents: at one year, children receiving atropine eye drops (3 studies; n = 629), pirenzepine gel (2 studies; n = 326), or cyclopentolate eye drops (1 study; n = 64) showed significantly less myopic progression compared with children receiving placebo: MD 1.00 D (95% CI 0.93 to 1.07), 0.31 D (95% CI 0.17 to 0.44), and 0.34 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.60), respectively (moderate-certainty evidence). Axial elongation was less for children treated with atropine (MD -0.35 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.31; n = 502) and pirenzepine (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.12; n = 326) than for those treated with placebo (moderate-certainty evidence) in two studies. Another study showed favorable results for three different doses of atropine eye drops compared with tropicamide eye drops (MD 0.78 D, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.07 for 0.1% atropine; MD 0.81 D, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.05 for 0.25% atropine; and MD 1.01 D, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.28 for 0.5% atropine; n = 196; low-certainty evidence) but did not report axial length. Systemic 7-methylxanthine had little to no effect on myopic progression (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) nor on axial elongation (MD -0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) compared with placebo in one study (n = 77; moderate-certainty evidence). One study did not find slowed myopia progression when comparing timolol eye drops with no drops (MD -0.05 D, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.11; n = 95; low-certainty evidence). Combinations of interventions: two studies found that children treated with atropine plus multifocal spectacles progressed 0.78 D (95% CI 0.54 to 1.02) less than children treated with placebo plus SVLs (n = 191; moderate-certainty evidence). One study reported -0.37 mm (95% CI -0.47 to -0.27) axial elongation for atropine and multifocal spectacles when compared with placebo plus SVLs (n = 127; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared with children treated with cyclopentolate plus SVLs, those treated with atropine plus multifocal spectacles progressed 0.36 D less (95% CI 0.11 to 0.61; n = 64; moderate-certainty evidence). Bifocal spectacles showed small or negligible effect compared with SVLs plus timolol drops in one study (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.32; n = 97; moderate-certainty evidence). One study comparing tropicamide plus bifocal spectacles versus SVLs reported no statistically significant differences between groups without quantitative results. No serious adverse events were reported across all interventions. Participants receiving antimuscarinic topical medications were more likely to experience accommodation difficulties (Risk Ratio [RR] 9.05, 95% CI 4.09 to 20.01) and papillae and follicles (RR 3.22, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.90) than participants receiving placebo (n=387; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antimuscarinic topical medication is effective in slowing myopia progression in children. Multifocal lenses, either spectacles or contact lenses, may also confer a small benefit. Orthokeratology contact lenses, although not intended to modify refractive error, were more effective than SVLs in slowing axial elongation. We found only low or very low-certainty evidence to support RGPCLs and sperical aberration SCLs.

Efficacy of 1% atropine eye drops in retarding progressive axial myopia in Indian eyes

Purpose:

The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of 1% atropine eye drops for the retardation of progressive axial myopia in Indian eyes.

Methods:

This prospective interventional cohort study included children aged 5–16 years. Both the eyes of myopic children with progressive increase of ≥−0.5D sphere/year with the best-corrected vision of ≥6/6 were treated with once a day application of 1% atropine eye drops and progressive addition photogray lenses. The progression of myopia after 1-year follow-up was analyzed.

Results:

Sixty eyes of thirty myopes were included in the study. The mean age was 10 years and 15 were girls. The mean baseline sphere was −5.2D (−2.5D–−13D). Mean duration of follow-up was 23 months (12–36 months). The baseline rate of progression was reduced from −0.6D/year (range −0.5D/year to −3D/year) to −0.2D/year (range 0D/year to −1.5D/year) after atropine therapy. Seventeen patients (57%) had to use the atropine in the daytime to reach the target progression of <−0.5D/year. There was no difference between the efficacy of atropine drops in the boys and girls (P = 0.6). The efficacy of atropine drops did not have a correlation with the age of the patients or the magnitude of baseline myopia (Pearson's r = 0).

Conclusion:

1% atropine eye drops was well tolerated and efficacious for the retardation of progressive myopia in Indian eyes. Effectiveness was better with daytime application. Further studies are necessary to assess the role of 1% atropine in the rapid progressors and patients poorly responding to low-dose atropine.

Infectious keratitis and orthokeratology lens use: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Myopia is a prevalent condition among Asians. Orthokeratology lens has gained popularity as a method of myopia control. This systematic review is to summarize the clinical profile of infectious keratitis in association with orthokeratology lens wear.

METHODS

We searched in the PubMed and EMBASE for articles adopting the search strategy "(orthokeratology lens OR orthokeratology) AND (bacterial eye infection OR keratitis OR cornea ulcer OR microbial keratitis OR bacterial keratitis)", from the start date of the databases to August 23, 2016. Articles reporting infectious keratitis in orthokeratology lens users with data of individual cases were considered eligible for this systematic review. We recorded the outcome measures including method of diagnosis, etiological agents, duration and mode of treatment and treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Our literature search yielded 172 papers. After removing duplicated and irrelevant reports, we included 29 articles for data analysis, involving 173 eyes. Among all reported cases, the mean age at presentation was 15.4 ± 6.2 years, with a female preponderance (male-to-female ratio 1:1.7). Positive microbiological cultures were reported in 69.4% of cases, with Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acanthamoeba being the most common etiological agents. The mean duration of hospitalization was 7.7 ± 6.7 days. Mean LogMAR visual acuity at presentation was 1.17 ± 0.78, increased to 0.33 ± 0.41 at final visit (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite early intervention and treatment, the majority of infections resulted in the formation of corneal scars and almost 10% of eyes needed surgical treatment. Timely awareness and treatment of keratitis should be emphasized to the users.

Atropine and Roscovitine Release from Model Silicone Hydrogels

PURPOSE

Drug delivery to the anterior eye has a low compliance and results in significant drug losses. In pediatric patients, eye diseases such as myopia and retinoblastoma can potentially be treated pharmacologically, but the risk associated with high drug concentrations coupled with the need for regular dosing limits their effectiveness. The current study examined the feasibility of atropine and roscovitine delivery from model silicone hydrogel materials which could potentially be used to treat myopia and retinoblastoma, respectively.

METHODS

Model silicone hydrogel materials that comprised TRIS and DMA were prepared with the drug incorporated during synthesis. Various materials properties, with and without incorporated drug, were investigated including water uptake, water contact angle, and light transmission. Drug release was evaluated under sink conditions into phosphate buffered saline.

RESULTS

The results demonstrate that up to 2 wt% of the drugs can be incorporated into model silicone hydrogel materials without adversely affecting critical materials properties such as water uptake, light transmission, and surface hydrophilicity. Equilibrium water content ranged from 15 to 32% and transmission exceeded 89% for materials with at least 70% DMA. Extended release exceeding 14 days was possible with both drugs, with the total amount of drug released from the materials ranging from 16% to over 76%. Although a burst effect was noted, this was thought to be due to surface-bound drug, and therefore storage in an appropriate packaging solution could be used to overcome this if desired.

CONCLUSIONS

Silicone hydrogel materials have the potential to deliver drugs for over 2 weeks without compromising lens properties. This could potentially overcome the need for regular drop instillation and allow for the maintenance of drug concentration in the tear film over the period of wear. This represents a potential option for treating a host of ophthalmic disorders in children including myopia and retinoblastoma.

Interventions to slow progression of myopia in children

BACKGROUND

Nearsightedness (myopia) causes blurry vision when looking at distant objects. Highly nearsighted people are at greater risk of several vision-threatening problems such as retinal detachments, choroidal atrophy, cataracts and glaucoma. Interventions that have been explored to slow the progression of myopia include bifocal spectacles, cycloplegic drops, intraocular pressure-lowering drugs, muscarinic receptor antagonists and contact lenses. The purpose of this review was to systematically assess the effectiveness of strategies to control progression of myopia in children.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of several types of interventions, including eye drops, undercorrection of nearsightedness, multifocal spectacles and contact lenses, on the progression of nearsightedness in myopic children younger than 18 years. We compared the interventions of interest with each other, to single vision lenses (SVLs) (spectacles), placebo or no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 10), MEDLINE (January 1950 to October 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2011), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2011), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov). There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 11 October 2011. We also searched the reference lists and Science Citation Index for additional, potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were treated with spectacles, contact lenses or pharmaceutical agents for the purpose of controlling progression of myopia. We excluded trials where participants were older than 18 years at baseline or participants had less than -0.25 diopters (D) spherical equivalent myopia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias for each included study. When possible, we analyzed data with the inverse variance method using a fixed-effect or random-effects model, depending on the number of studies and amount of heterogeneity detected.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies (4696 total participants) in this review, with 17 of these studies included in quantitative analysis. Since we only included RCTs in the review, the studies were generally at low risk of bias for selection bias. Undercorrection of myopia was found to increase myopia progression slightly in two studies; children who were undercorrected progressed on average 0.15 D (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to 0.00) more than the fully corrected SVLs wearers at one year. Rigid gas permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) were found to have no evidence of effect on myopic eye growth in two studies (no meta-analysis due to heterogeneity between studies). Progressive addition lenses (PALs), reported in four studies, and bifocal spectacles, reported in four studies, were found to yield a small slowing of myopia progression. For seven studies with quantitative data at one year, children wearing multifocal lenses, either PALs or bifocals, progressed on average 0.16 D (95% CI 0.07 to 0.25) less than children wearing SVLs. The largest positive effects for slowing myopia progression were exhibited by anti-muscarinic medications. At one year, children receiving pirenzepine gel (two studies), cyclopentolate eye drops (one study), or atropine eye drops (two studies) showed significantly less myopic progression compared with children receiving placebo (mean differences (MD) 0.31 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.44), 0.34 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.60), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.90), respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The most likely effective treatment to slow myopia progression thus far is anti-muscarinic topical medication. However, side effects of these medications include light sensitivity and near blur. Also, they are not yet commercially available, so their use is limited and not practical. Further information is required for other methods of myopia control, such as the use of corneal reshaping contact lenses or bifocal soft contact lenses (BSCLs) with a distance center are promising, but currently no published randomized clinical trials exist.