Visual performance of myopia control soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopes

Myopia Control: Are We Ready for an Evidence Based Approach?

INTRODUCTION

Myopia and its vision-threatening complications present a significant public health problem. This review aims to provide an updated overview of the multitude of known and emerging interventions to control myopia, including their potential effect, safety, and costs.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of three databases was conducted. Interventions were grouped into four categories: environmental/behavioral (outdoor time, near work), pharmacological (e.g., atropine), optical interventions (spectacles and contact lenses), and novel approaches such as red-light (RLRL) therapies. Review articles and original articles on randomized controlled trials (RCT) were selected.

RESULTS

From the initial 3224 retrieved records, 18 reviews and 41 original articles reporting results from RCTs were included. While there is more evidence supporting the efficacy of low-dose atropine and certain myopia-controlling contact lenses in slowing myopia progression, the evidence about the efficacy of the newer interventions, such as spectacle lenses (e.g., defocus incorporated multiple segments and highly aspheric lenslets) is more limited. Behavioral interventions, i.e., increased outdoor time, seem effective for preventing the onset of myopia if implemented successfully in schools and homes. While environmental interventions and spectacles are regarded as generally safe, pharmacological interventions, contact lenses, and RLRL may be associated with adverse effects. All interventions, except for behavioral change, are tied to moderate to high expenditures.

CONCLUSION

Our review suggests that myopia control interventions are recommended and prescribed on the basis of accessibility and clinical practice patterns, which vary widely around the world. Clinical trials indicate short- to medium-term efficacy in reducing myopia progression for various interventions, but none have demonstrated long-term effectiveness in preventing high myopia and potential complications in adulthood. There is an unmet need for a unified consensus for strategies that balance risk and effectiveness for these methods for personalized myopia management.

Visual performance of optical films utilizing Spatio-Temporal Optical Phase technology

SIGNIFICANCE

Spatio-Temporal Optical Phase technology utilizes film pairs containing optical elements applied to standard single-vision spectacle lenses. This technology provides a dynamic optical cue that may have efficacy in reducing the rate of myopia progression, but the visual performance of this technology is unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the visual performance of film pairs containing optical elements (tests) and a film pair with no optical elements (control).

METHODS

In this randomized, single-masked, bilateral wear study, 42 participants aged 18 to 40 years wore four test designs (E, F-1, G, and F-2) and the control. Subjective data (subjective ratings [1 to 10 scale]: clarity of vision [far-away, intermediate, near] and vision [at night, while walking, overall satisfaction], and willingness to purchase [yes/no response]) were collected after 3 days. Visual acuity (VA)-based measures (monocular high/low-contrast VA [6 m], contrast sensitivity [6 m], and binocular high-contrast VA [6 m and 40 cm]) were collected at dispensing. Visual acuity-based measures were also collected while wearing spectacles with no film. Analyses were performed using linear mixed models and the χ2 test. Significance was set at 5%.

RESULTS

The control performed better than any test for all subjective ratings (mean differences, 1.6 to 3.1 units: p<0.001), willingness to purchase (p<0.001), and designs F-1 and F-2 for binocular high-contrast VA at 40 cm (p=0.001 and p=0.01, respectively). Clarity of vision was significantly worse with F-2 compared with F-1 and G (p<0.001 and p=0.02, respectively). There were no differences between tests for any other subjective rating (p>0.1), willingness to purchase (p=0.11), or any VA-based measure (p>0.08). There were no differences between control and spectacles with no film for any VA-based measure (p>0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

All four test film pairs reduced visual performance compared with control to a degree comparable with other myopia management devices. There was no difference in visual performance between three of the four test film pairs.

Two-Year Myopia Management Efficacy of Extended Depth of Focus Soft Contact Lenses (MYLO) in Caucasian Children

PURPOSE

To evaluate the progression of myopia as assessed by change in axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent (SE) from baseline in Caucasian children wearing extended depth of focus soft contact lenses (CLs) compared to distance single-vision spectacles.

DESIGN

Prospective non-randomized comparative clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 90 children (6-13 years of age) with SE ranging from -0.75 to -10.00 diopters (D) were recruited. Of these children, 45 were fitted with CLs (MYLO, mark´ennovy), whereas 45 children wore spectacles. Cycloplegic refraction was measured with an auto-refractometer (Topcon-TRK-2P) and AL with an IOLMaster-700 (Zeiss) at 6-month intervals. Subjective responses after 1 month of CL wear related to vision and comfort were determined using a questionnaire with a scale from 1 (very poor) to 10 (excellent). High-contrast visual acuity (HCVA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) were evaluated at baseline, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS

After 2 years, mean change in SE/AL in the CL group was -0.62 ± 0.30 D/0.37 ± 0.04 mm and -1.13 ± 0.20 D/0.66 ± 0.03 mm in the spectacles group (P < .001). Cumulative absolute reduction in axial elongation (CARE) was 0.29 ± 0.06 mm. Difference in SE change was -0.50 ± 0.34 D. Although 100% of CL group had an AL increase ≤0.50 mm, all participants increased ≥0.50 mm in the spectacles group. In all, 53% of the CL group and 1% in the spectacles group showed a progression in SE ≤ -0.50D. All questionnaire items showed a mean value ≥9. There was a reduction logMAR HCVA in the CL compared to the spectacles group but it was less than 1 line (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of MYLO CLs reduced axial elongation and myopia progression compared to use of distance single-vision spectacles.

Myopia management algorithm. Annexe to the article titled Update and guidance on management of myopia. European Society of Ophthalmology in cooperation with International Myopia Institute

Myopia is becoming increasingly common in young generations all over the world, and it is predicted to become the most common cause of blindness and visual impairment in later life in the near future. Because myopia can cause serious complications and vision loss, it is critical to create and prescribe effective myopia treatment solutions that can help prevent or delay the onset and progression of myopia. The scientific understanding of myopia's causes, genetic background, environmental conditions, and various management techniques, including therapies to prevent or postpone its development and slow its progression, is rapidly expanding. However, some significant information gaps exist on this subject, making it difficult to develop an effective intervention plan. As with the creation of this present algorithm, a compromise is to work on best practices and reach consensus among a wide number of specialists. The quick rise in information regarding myopia management may be difficult for the busy eye care provider, but it necessitates a continuing need to evaluate new research and implement it into daily practice. To assist eye care providers in developing these strategies, an algorithm has been proposed that covers all aspects of myopia mitigation and management. The algorithm aims to provide practical assistance in choosing and developing an effective myopia management strategy tailored to the individual child. It incorporates the latest research findings and covers a wide range of modalities, from primary, secondary, and tertiary myopia prevention to interventions that reduce the progression of myopia.

Visual Performance of Two Designs of Myopia Management Soft Contact Lenses Compared with a Monofocal One in Young Adults

Purpose

To compare the visual performance of two distinct types of soft contact lenses (CL) aimed at slowing down myopia progression with the performance of a monofocal soft CL.

Methods

In a prospective double-masked, crossover trial, 18 myopic adults (aged 18-30 years old) were fitted in a randomized order with three types of disposable CL: MiSightTM (dual-focus), MyloTM (extended depth of focus -EDOF-), and ClaritiTM (single distance vision). Measurements were taken after wearing the CL for five days with five days off in between at two different optometry centers. High contrast distance visual acuity (VA) with spectacles and for each of the different CL, subjective refraction, slit lamp exam, aberrometry, stereopsis, monocular and binocular amplitude of accommodation and accommodative facility, and horizontal phorias were measured.

Results

The high contrast distance VAwas better for the single vision CL compared to the myopia control CL. No significant differences were observed between the r two myopia control CL. The overall root mean square (RMS) was higher for the double focus CL (RMS = 1.18 ± 0.29 µm), followed by the EDOF CL (RMS = 0.76 ± 0.35 µm) and then the single vision CL (RMS = 0.50 ± 0.19 µm). The primary spherical aberration (SA) mean value was low for all of the three CL, without statistical differences among them. No other significant differences were detected.

Conclusion

The overall RMS resulted in a higher value for the dual-focus than the EDOF CL, but no differences in high contrast distance VA and binocularity were detected between them. The monofocal CL's performance was better than the myopia control CL.

Comparison of optical myopia control interventions: effect on peripheral image quality and vision

This study compares the effects on peripheral vision and image quality of four myopia control interventions: a) Perifocal spectacles/ArtOptica, b) Stellest spectacles/Essilor), c) MiyoSmart spectacles/Hoya and d) MiSight contact lenses/CooperVision. Five subjects participated with habitual or no correction as reference. Three techniques were used: 1) Hartmann-Shack sensors for wavefront errors, 2) double-pass imaging system for point-spread-functions (PSF), and 3) peripheral acuity evaluation. The results show that multiple evaluation methods are needed to fully quantify the optical effects of these myopia control interventions. Perifocal was found to make the relative peripheral refraction (RPR) more myopic in all subjects and to interact with the natural optical errors of the eye, hence showing larger variations in the effect on peripheral vision. MiSight had a smaller effect on RPR, but large effect on peripheral vision. Stellest and MiyoSmart also showed small effects on RPR but had broader double-pass PSFs for all participants, indicating reduced retinal contrast. Reduction in peripheral retinal contrast might thereby play a role in slowing myopia progression even when the peripheral refraction does not turn more myopic.

The effect of concentric and aspheric multifocal soft contact lenses on binocular vision in young adult myopes

PURPOSE

Multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCLs) are prescribed to inhibit myopia progression; these include aspheric and concentric designs. The effects of MFCLs on visual quality, accommodation and vergence in young-adult myopes were evaluated.

METHODS

Participants were twenty-six myopes (19-25 years, spherical equivalent -0.50 to -5.75D), with normal binocular vision and no past myopia control. Pupil sizes were 4.4 ± 0.9 mm during distance viewing and 3.7 ± 0.8 mm at near. In random order, participants wore four MFCLs: Proclear single vision distance, MiSight concentric dual focus (+2.00D), distance center aspheric (Biofinity, +2.50D) (CooperVision lenses), and NaturalVue aspheric (Visioneering Technologies). Testing included visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (Pelli-Robson), stereoacuity, accommodation response, negative and positive relative accommodation, horizontal phorias, horizontal fusional vergence and AC/A ratio, and a visual quality questionnaire.

RESULTS

The four lenses differed in distance (p = 0.001) and near visual acuity (p = 0.011), and contrast sensitivity (p = 0.001). Compared with the single vision lens, the Biofinity aspheric had the greatest visual impact: 0.19 ± 0.14 logMAR distance acuity reduction, 0.22 ± 0.15 log contrast sensitivity reduction. Near acuity was affected less than distance acuity; the reduction was greatest with the NaturalVue (0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR reduction). The MFCLs altered the autorefraction measure at distance and near (p = 0.001); the accommodation response was less with aspheric lenses. Negative relative accommodation reduced with the aspheric lenses (p = 0.001): by 0.9 ± 0.5D with Biofinity and 0.5 ± 0.7D with NaturalVue. Exophoric shifts were greater with aspheric lenses (1.8 ± 2.4Δ Biofinity, 1.7 ± 1.7Δ NaturalVue) than with the concentric MiSight (0.5 ± 1.3Δ).

CONCLUSIONS

MFCLs alter visual performance, refraction and vergence; two aspheric lenses had greater effect than a concentric lens.

Centration assessment of an extended depth of focus contact lens for myopic progression control

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy and the inter and intra-observer reliability of the centration assessment of extended depth of focus (EDOF) contact lenses (CL) using corneal topography.

METHOD

EDOF soft CLs (Mylo, Mark'Ennovy) were fitted on thirty-three myopic students (25 females), aged 19-28 years (22.7 ± 2.0 years). For any EDOF CL, a topography over the CL and a slit lamp (SL) digital picture were taken in random order. For the topographic images, the position of the EDOF CL centre, with respect to the pupil centre, was detected by two different practitioners (one newly graduated and one with more than 20 years of clinical experience respectively) and repeated after 15 days. This measurement was compared to the one taken through the SL, considered as the gold standard, and assessed using the instrument software.

RESULTS

EDOF CLs resulted decentred inferiorly and temporally ranging, in the case of slit lamp assessment, between -0.27 ± 0.19 and 0.22 ± 0.23 mm horizontally and between -0.12 ± 0.31 and -0.17 ± 0.34 mm vertically, for the right and left eye respectively. The accuracy of the topographic assessment in determining EDOF CL centration was found to be very good compared to the SL assessment. No differences were found for the left eye, whereas in the right eye, a less temporally decentred position of the CL was detected by the topographical method (p < 0.05). However, this difference appeared clinically negligible (0.14 ± 0.22 mm). Inter-observer reliability (the differences between the two practitioners in assessing the EDOF centre) resulted significant only for the vertical coordinates of the centre position (p < 0.05). Concerning intra-observer reliability, better coefficient of precision and reliability between measurements within the same session were achieved by the more experienced practitioner, as well as a better level of the intraclass correlation coefficient in test-retest.

CONCLUSION

The centration of the EDOF CL investigated in this study can be accurately detected by a corneal topography performed over CLs. Inter-observer reliability resulted good whereas the intra-observer reliability resulted partially affected by the level of clinical experience of the practitioner.

Visual Performance and Binocular/Accommodative Function of S.T.O.P. Contact Lenses Compared With MiSight

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the visual performance and binocular/accommodative function of two novel S.T.O.P. design (F2 and DT) contact lenses against MiSight when worn by myopic, young adults.

METHOD

This was a prospective, randomized, cross-over, single-masked study. Each lens was worn daily wear with overnight peroxide disinfection for approximately 7 days. Visual performance was assessed with subjective ratings (0-100): clarity of vision and lack of ghosting (far away, intermediate, and near), vision when driving, overall vision satisfaction, and with monocular high-contrast and low-contrast visual acuity (HCVA/LCVA) at 6 m, binocular HCVA (6 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, and 40 cm), binocular LCVA (6 m and 70 cm). Binocular function was assessed with heterophorias (3 m and 40 cm). Accommodative function was assessed with monocular accommodative facility (AF: 40 cm) and dynamic monocular accommodative response (AR: 6 m, 70 cm, and 40 cm).

RESULTS

F2 was rated higher than MiSight for clarity of vision (near and intermediate) and lack-of-ghosting ( P <0.001), while MiSight was rated higher than DT for clarity of vision (near, P <0.001). MiSight was better than F2 and DT for monocular HCVA (6 m) and binocular HCVA (6 m and 40 cm, P ≤0.02), but the maximum difference was ≤2 letters. There were no differences between designs for heterophoria ( P =0.61) nor were there any differences between DT and MiSight for any accommodative measure ( P >0.1). F2 was higher for monocular-AF ( P =0.007) and lower for AR (70 cm and 40 cm; P ≤0.007) compared with MiSight.

CONCLUSIONS

The visual performance and binocular/accommodative function of S.T.O.P. designs F2 and DT were comparable with MiSight. F2 outperformed MiSight in some aspects of subjective visual performance and monocular accommodative function.

Time-Serial Evaluation of the Development and Treatment of Myopia in Mice Eyes Using OCT and ZEMAX

Myopia is a significant cause of visual impairment which may lead to many complications. However, the understanding of the mechanisms of myopia is still limited. In this paper, in order to investigate the development and the treatment of myopia, we analyzed the biological structure parameters of mice eyes, obtained from optical coherence tomography (OCT), and the optical performance of mice eyes calculated using ZEMAX software (ZEMAX Development Corporation, Kirkland, WA, USA) in which the optical model was built on the segment-by-segment optically corrected OCT 3D-images. Time-serial evaluation of three groups of mice eyes (form-deprivation myopia mice eyes, normal mice eyes, and atropine-treated myopia mice eyes) was performed. In addition to the biological structure parameters, imaging performance with the development of root-mean-square wavefront aberration at six filed angles was compared and analyzed. Results show that the biological structure parameters of the eye are closely related to the development of myopia. The peripheral defocus of the retina has a significant impact on inducing myopia, which verifies the new theory of myopia development. The delaying effect of atropine solution on myopia development is shown to verify the therapeutic effect of the medicine. This study provides technical support for the investigation of the myopia mechanism.

Efficacy of contact lenses for myopia control: Insights from a randomised, contralateral study design

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of two myopia control contact lenses (CL) compared with a single-vision (SV) CL.

METHODS

Ninety-five Chinese children with myopia, aged 7-13 years in a 1-year prospective, randomised, contralateral, cross-over clinical trial with 3 groups; bilateral SVCL (Group I); randomised, contralateral wear of an extended depth of focus (EDOF) CL and SVCL (Group II) and MiSight® CL and SVCL (Group III). In Groups II and III, CL were crossed over at the 6-month point (Stage 1) and worn for a further 6 months (Stage 2). Group I wore SVCL during both stages. At baseline and the end of each stage, cycloplegic spherical equivalent refractive error (SE) and axial length (AL) were measured. Six-monthly ΔSE/ΔAL across groups was analysed using a linear mixed model (CL type, stage, eye and eye* stage included as factors). Intra-group paired differences between eyes were determined.

RESULTS

In Group I, mean (SD) ΔSE/ΔAL with SVCL was -0.41 (0.28) D/0.13 (0.09) mm and -0.25 (0.27) D/0.16 (0.09) mm for stages 1 and 2, with a mean paired difference between eyes of 0.01 D/0.01 mm and 0.05 D/-0.01 mm, respectively. ΔSE/ΔAL with SVCL was similar across Groups I to III (Stage 1: p = 0.89/0.44, Stage 2: p = 0.70/ 0.64). In Groups II and III, ΔSE/ΔAL was lower with the EDOF and MiSight® CL than the contralateral SVCL in 68% to 94% of participants, and adjusted 6-month ΔSE/ΔAL with EDOF was similar to MiSight® (p = 0.49/0.56 for ΔSE/ΔAL, respectively). Discontinuations across the three groups were high, but not different between the groups (33.3%, 48.4% and 50% for Groups I to III, respectively [p = 0.19]) and most discontinuations occurred immediately after baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended depth of focus and MiSight® CL demonstrated similar efficacy in slowing myopia. When switched from a myopia control CL to SVCL, myopia progression was similar to that observed with age-matched wearers in SVCL and not suggestive of rebound.

Short-term tear film stability, optical quality and visual performance in two dual-focus contact lenses for myopia control with different optical designs

Purpose

To assess and compare short‐term visual and optical quality and tear film stability between two dual‐focus (DF) prototype myopia control contact lenses (CLs) having different inner zone diameters.

Methods

Twenty‐eight myopic subjects were included in this randomised, double‐masked crossover study. Refraction, best‐corrected visual acuity (VA) and tear film stability were measured at baseline (i.e., when uncorrected). Subjects were then binocularly fitted with the DF CLs, with only the sensorial dominant eye being assessed. Lenses were of the same material and had inner zone diameters of either 2.1 mm (S design) or 4.0 mm (M design). Visual and physical short‐term lens comfort, over‐refraction, best‐corrected VA, stereopsis at 40 cm, best‐corrected photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS), size and shape of light disturbance (LD), wavefront aberrations, subjective quality of vision (QoV Questionnaire) and tear film stability were measured for each lens.

Results

Both CL designs decreased tear film stability compared with baseline (p < 0.05). VA and photopic CS were within normal values for the subjects' age with each CL. When comparing lenses, the M design promoted better photopic CS for the 18 cycles per degree spatial frequency (p < 0.001) and better LD (p < 0.02). However, higher‐order aberrations were improved with the S design (p = 0.02). No significant difference between the two CLs was found for QoV scores and tear film stability.

Conclusions

Both DF CLs provided acceptable visual performance under photopic conditions. The 4.0 mm inner zone gave better contrast sensitivity at high frequencies and lower light disturbance, while the 2.1 mm central diameter induced fewer higher‐order aberrations for a 5 mm pupil diameter. Both CLs produced the same subjective visual short‐term lens comfort.

Foveal and peripheral visual quality and accommodation with multifocal contact lenses

Multifocal contact lenses are increasingly popular interventions for controlling myopia. This study presents the short-term effects of multifocal contact lenses on foveal and peripheral vision. The MiSight contact lenses designed to inhibit myopia progression and the 1-Day Acuvue Moist contact lenses designed for presbyopia were investigated. The MiSight produced similar foveal results to spectacles despite the increased astigmatism and coma. The MiSight also reduced the low-contrast resolution acuity in the periphery, despite no clear change in relative peripheral refraction. When compared with spectacles, Acuvue Moist decreased accommodative response and reduced foveal high- and low-contrast resolution acuity, whereas peripheral thresholds were more similar to those of spectacles. The most likely treatment property for myopia control by the MiSight is the contrast reduction in the peripheral visual field and the changed accommodation.

Contrast Sensitivity with Center-distance Multifocal Soft Contact Lenses

SIGNIFICANCE

The contrast sensitivity (CS) function provides a more detailed assessment of vision than visual acuity. It was found that center-distance multifocal contact lens designs that are increasingly being prescribed for myopia control reduce distance photopic and mesopic CS in nonpresbyopic patients across a range of spatial frequencies.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the effect of center-distance multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCLs) on CS under photopic and mesopic conditions in nonpresbyopic patients.

METHODS

Twenty-five myopic, nonpresbyopic adults were fitted binocularly with three lenses: Biofinity single vision contact lens (SVCL), Biofinity Multifocal D +2.50 add, and NaturalVue Multifocal in random order. Contrast sensitivity was measured at distance (4 m) under photopic and mesopic conditions and at near under photopic conditions. Log CS by spatial frequency and area under the log contrast sensitivity function (AULCSF) were analyzed between lenses.

RESULTS

Distance photopic CS at each spatial frequency was higher with the SVCL than the MFCLs (P < .001), but there was no difference between the MFCLs (P = .71). Distance mesopic CS from 1.5 to 12 cycles per degree (cpd) was higher with the SVCL than the MFCLs (all P < .02); however, at 18 cpd, there was no difference in CS between NaturalVue and the SVCL (P = .76), possibly because of spurious resolution. Photopic AULCSF for the SVCL was roughly 10% greater than both MFCLs. Contrast sensitivity at near was generally similar between lenses, only slightly lower with the NaturalVue at 11 and 15.5 cpd, but AULCSF at near was not different between lenses (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Multifocal contact lenses reduce distance contrast sensitivity under both photopic and mesopic conditions. There is no clinically significant difference in near CS among all three lenses. These data show that MFCLs have effects on vision that are not captured by standard high-contrast visual acuity testing.

Visual performance with multifocal lenses in young adults and presbyopes

A better understanding of visual performance with Multifocal Contact Lenses (MCLs) is essential, both in young eyes, where MCLs may be prescribed to control the progression of myopia wherein the MCLs optics interact with accommodation, and in presbyopes, where MCLs are increasingly used to compensate the lack of accommodation. In this study, we evaluated the through focus visual acuity (TFVA) with center-near MCLs of three additions (low, medium and high) and without an addition (NoLens) in 10 young adults and 5 presbyopes. We studied the effect of accommodation, age and pupil diameter (in cyclopleged subjects) on visual performance. The MCLs produced a small but consistent degradation at far (by 0.925 logMAR, averaged across eyes and conditions) and a consistent benefit at near in young subjects with paralyzed accommodation (by 1.025 logMAR), and in presbyopes with both paralyzed and natural accommodation (by 1.071 logMAR, on average). TFVA in young adults with NoLens and all MCLs showed statistically significant differences (Wilcoxan, p<0.01) between natural and paralyzed accommodation, but not in presbyopes with MCLs. In young adults, VA improved with increasing pupil diameter with the HighAdd MCL (0.08 logMAR shift from 3 to 5-mm pupil size). Visual imbalance (standard deviation of VA across distances) was reduced with MCLs, and decreased significantly with increasing near add. The lowest imbalance occurred in young adults under natural accommodation and was further reduced by 13.33% with MCLs with respect to the NoLens condition. Overall, the visual performance with MCLs in young adults exceeds that in presbyopes at all distances, and was better than 0.00 logMAR over the dioptric range tested. In conclusion, the center-near lenses do not degrade the near high contrast visual acuity significantly but maintains the far vision in young adults, and produce some visual benefit at near in presbyopes.

Modelling the refractive and imaging impact of multi-zone lenses utilised for myopia control in children's eyes

PURPOSE

To develop an optical model of a child's eye to reveal the impact of target distance and accommodative behaviour on retinal image quality when fitted with multi-zone lenses.

METHODS

Pupil size, aberration levels and accommodative lag were adjusted for models viewing stimuli at 400, 100, 33 and 20 cm. Distributions of defocus across the pupil and simulated retinal images were obtained. An equivalent 16-point letter was imaged at near viewing distances, while a 0.00 logMAR (6/6) letter was imaged at 400 cm. Multi-zone lenses included those clinically utilised for myopia control (e.g., dual-focus, multi-segmented and aspherical optics).

RESULTS

Viewing distance adjustments to model spherical aberration (SA) and pupil radius resulted in a model eye with wider defocus distributions at closer viewing distances, especially at 20 cm. The increasing negative SA at near reduced the effective add power of dual-focus lenses, reducing the amount of myopic defocus introduced by the centre-distance, 2-zone design. The negative SA at near largely compensated for the high positive SA introduced by the aspheric lens, removing most myopic defocus when viewing at near. A 0.50 D accommodative lag had little impact on the legibility of typical text (16-point) at the closer viewing distances.

CONCLUSIONS

All four multi-zone lenses successfully generated myopic defocus at greater viewing distances, but two failed to introduce significant amounts of myopic defocus at the nearest viewing distance due to the combined effects of pupil miosis and negative SA. Typical 16-point type is easily legible at near even in presence of the multi-zone optics of lenses utilised for myopia control and accommodative lag.

Short-Term Effect of Wearing of Extended Depth-of-Focus Contact Lenses in Myopic Children: A Pilot Study

This pseudo-experimental, prospective, and longitudinal pilot study was conducted to characterize the optical and visual changes occurring in the short-term wear of a hydrophilic contact lens (CL) based on extended focus technology (EDOF). A total of 30 eyes of 15 children (age, 6–16 years) were fitted with the EDOF CL Mylo (Mark’ennovy Care SL), performing an exhaustive follow-up for one month evaluating changes in visual acuity (VA), accommodation, binocularity, ocular aberrometry, visual quality, pupillometry, keratometry and biometry. Far and near VA with the CL improved progressively (p < 0.001), obtaining mean final binocular values of −0.08 ± 0.01 and −0.07 ± 0.01 LogMAR, respectively. There was a mean reduction in the accommodative LAG of 0.30 D (p < 0.001), without associated alterations in the magnitude of the phoria and fusional vergences (p ≥ 0.066). A controlled but statistically significant increase (p ≤ 0.005) of ocular high order aberration (HOA) root mean square (RMS), primary coma RMS, primary spherical aberration Zernike term and secondary astigmatism RMS was found with the CL wear. In conclusion, the EDOF CL evaluated provides adequate visual acuity and quality, with associated increased of several HOAs and a trend to reduction in the accommodative LAG that should be confirmed in future studies.

Vision with spatial light modulator simulating multifocal contact lenses in an adaptive optics system

Visual simulators are useful tools to provide patients experience of multifocal vision prior to treatment. In this study, commercially available center-near aspheric multifocal contact lenses (MCLs) of low, medium, and high additions were mapped on a spatial light modulator (SLM) and validated on a bench. Through focus visual acuity (TFVA) was measured in subjects through the SLM and real MCLs on the eye. A correlation metric revealed statistically significant shape similarity between TFVA curves with real and simulated MCLs. A Bland-Altman analysis showed differences within confidence intervals of ±0.01 logMAR for LowAdd/MediumAdd and ±0.06 logMAR for HighAdd. Visual performance with simulated MCLs outperformed real MCLs by ∼20%. In conclusion, SLM captures the profile of center-near MCLs and reproduces vision with real MCLs, revealing that the MCL profile and its interactions with the eye's optics (and not fitting aspects) account for the majority of the contributions to visual performance with MCLs.

Ocular and corneal aberrations changes in controlled randomized clinical trial MiSight® Assessment Study Spain (MASS)

Background

To compare ocular and corneal inherent aberrations in the naked eyes of randomly selected children fitted with MiSight contact lenses (CL) for myopia control, versus children corrected with single-vision spectacles (control), over a 24-months period.

Methods

Children aged 8 to 12 years, with myopia (-0.75 to -4.00 D sphere) and astigmatism (< -1.00 D cylinder) were randomly assigned to the lens study group (MiSight) or the control group (single-vision spectacles). The root mean square aberration (RMS) was determined as corneal (RMS_C), corneal high order RMS (HO_RMS_C), corneal low order RMS (LO_RMS_C), ocular (total) RMS (RMS_T), ocular high order RMS (HO_RMS_T), ocular low order RMS (LO_RMS_T), corneal spherical aberration (SA_C) and ocular SA (SA_T) were calculated by aberrometry measures at the baseline, on 12-months and 24-months visits. A 5 mm diameter was defined for the analysis in all visits for all subjects. Only the dominant eye was analyzed.

Results

Seventy-four subjects completed the clinical trial: 41 subjects from the MiSight group (age: 11.01 ± 1.23 years) and 33 from the single-vision group (age: 10.12 ± 1.38 years). RMS_T significantly changed (0.57 ± 0.20 µm, p = 0.029) after 24-months in the control group. In the MiSight group no significant changes were registered (p > 0.05). The SA_C and SA_T did not reveal significant changes between visits or between groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Along 2 years, MiSight CL did not induce significant changes in RMS of anterior cornea or total ocular RMS. Contrary, in control group the RMS_T significantly changed as response of greater eye growth and myopia progression. The results obtained in present study allow to predict corneal or total aberration changes, in children, in response of wearing of MiSight lens along the time.

Trial registration

: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01917110.

Bayesian Meta-Analysis of Myopia Control with Multifocal Lenses

The aim of this study is to provide reliable guidelines for the mean percentage efficacy together with the 95% credibility interval in slowing down progression of myopia by a specific intervention over defined time periods, derived from a substantial number of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) with consistent outcomes. Multifocal spectacles and contact lenses represent interventions with the largest number of RCTs carried out. Our meta-analyses considered 10 RCTs involving 1662 children which have tested the efficacy of progressive addition spectacle lenses (PALs). In a separate model for comparison purposes nine RCTs with 982 children trialling soft multifocal contact lenses (MFCLs) were analysed. Bayesian random-effects hierarchical models were fitted. The highest efficacy in retarding progression of the scaled sphere equivalent refraction was achieved after 12 M follow-up with the mean 28% reduction in progression and the 95% credibility interval between 21% and 35%. For comparison, the 95% credibility interval for the mean efficacy of soft MFCLs at 12 M follow up is 21% to 37%. We conclude that both multifocal spectacle and contact lenses moderately slow down progression of myopia, relative to single-vision spectacle lenses (SVLs) in the first 12 months after intervention. The relative efficacy of PALs tends to weaken after the first 12 months.

Under-correction or full correction of myopia? A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of full-correction versus under-correction on myopia progression.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Ovid, Web of Science and Cochrane library. Methodological quality assessment of the literature was evaluated according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. Statistical analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 2, Biostat Inc., USA).

RESULTS

The present meta-analysis included six studies (two randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and four non-RCTs) with 695 subjects (full-correction group, n=371; under-correction group, n=324) aged 6 to 33 years. Using cycloplegic refraction, the pooled difference in mean of myopia progression was - 0.179 D [lower and higher limits: -0.383, 0.025], which was higher but not in full correction group as compared to under correction group (p=0.085). Regarding studies using non-cycloplegic subjective refraction according to maximum plus for maximum visual acuity, the pooled difference in myopia progression was 0.128 D [lower and higher limits: -0.057, 0.312] higher in under-correction group compared with full-correction group (p=0.175). Although, difference in myopia progression did not reach significant level in either cycloplegic or non-cycloplegic refraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that, myopic eyes which are fully corrected with non-cycloplegic refraction with maximum plus sphere, are less prone to myopia progression, in comparison to those which were under corrected. However, regarding cycloplegic refraction, further studies are needed to better understand these trends.

Exploring non-adherence to contact lens wear schedule: Subjective assessments and patient related factors in children wearing single vision and myopia control contact lenses

PURPOSE

To determine factors associated with non-adherence to contact lens wear schedule involving single vision and myopia control contact lenses in children.

METHODS

Data from 379 children enrolled in a prospective, double masked, randomized clinical trial, aged 8-13 years, cycloplegic spherical equivalent of -0.75 to -3.50D and wearing either: single vision silicone hydrogel (SiH) CL (control lens); two anti-myopia SiH CL that incorporated relative plus in the central and periphery in a stepped manner (test lens I and II); and two extended depth of focus hydrogel CL (test lens III and IV) was considered. A questionnaire was administered to the participants at every scheduled visit and gathered information on days of wear/week and subjective assessments of ocular comfort and visual quality on an analog scale of 1-10.Participants were categorized as "Adherent" when lens wear was ≥ 6 days/week or "Non-adherent" when lens wear ≤ 5 days/week. Categorized adherence data was summarized as a percentage across visits for each CL type. Differences between the two groups were analyzed using linear mixed model.

RESULTS

For the control lens, 79.6 % participants were adherent as compared to 63.7%-74.6% with test lenses (p=0.026). Non-adherence was greater in those that discontinued (p<0.001). Subjective ratings of visual quality for static and dynamic tasks were lower with non-adherent wearers and more variable between visits. Ocular comfort was also poorer in non-adherent wearers irrespective of lens material or lens design. Male gender, lower baseline myopia, lower high contrast visual acuity and esophoria were associated with a higher risk of non-adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified a wide range of factors associated with non-adherence to lens wear schedule. Paying specific attention to these factors when evaluating patients for CL wear and taking steps to ensure satisfaction in lens wear may promote longer term continuation of wear.

Slowing the Progression of Myopia in Children with the MiSight Contact Lens: A Narrative Review of the Evidence

Myopia has become a major public health problem in the world due to the increase in its prevalence in the past few decades and due to sight-threatening pathologies associated with high myopia such as cataracts, glaucoma and especially myopic maculopathy. This article is a narrative review of the evidence that currently exists on a contact lenses (CLs) specifically designed to correct myopia and to slow its progression. To contextualise the topic we discuss the different classifications and definitions that have been used for myopia, the current burden of being myopic, and current treatment options to prevent and control its progression. There is evidence that exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of myopia onset and pharmacological treatment with atropine has been shown to be the most effective therapy for controlling its progression, followed by optical interventions such as CL fitting (orthokeratology or CLs specific for myopia control) designed to decrease retinal peripheral hyperopic defocus that seems to be the theory that suggests that axial elongation is driven by this defocus and explains why the eye continues to grow abnormally after emmetropisation and generates myopia. We will especially focus on MiSight CLs. MiSight is a daily replacement soft contact lens that has been clinically proven and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to control the progression of myopia in children. We analyse the optical design of MiSight CLs, as well as the results of the different efficacy and safety studies that led to the approval of the lens by the FDA. We also expose current knowledge gaps, limitations and future directions.

Changing accommodation behaviour during multifocal soft contact lens wear using auditory biofeedback training

Biofeedback training has been used to access autonomically-controlled body functions through visual or acoustic signals to manage conditions like anxiety and hyperactivity. Here we examined the use of auditory biofeedback to improve accommodative responses to near visual stimuli in patients wearing single vision (SV) and multifocal soft contact lenses (MFCL). MFCLs are one evidence-based treatment shown to be effective in slowing myopia progression in children. However, previous research found that the positive addition relaxed accommodation at near, possibly reducing the therapeutic benefit. Accommodation accuracy was examined in 18 emmetropes and 19 myopes while wearing SVCLs and MFCLs (centre-distance). Short periods of auditory biofeedback training to improve the response (reduce the lag of accommodation) was performed and accommodation re-assessed while patients wore the SVCLs and MFCLs. Significantly larger accommodative lags were measured with MFCLs compared to SV. Biofeedback training effectively reduced the lag by ≥0.3D in individuals of both groups with SVCL and MFCL wear. The training was more effective in myopes wearing their habitual SVCLs. This study shows that accommodation can be changed with short biofeedback training independent of the refractive state. With this proof-of-concept, we hypothesize that biofeedback training in myopic children wearing MFCLs might improve the treatment effectiveness.