Effect of Dual-Focus Soft Contact Lens Wear on Axial Myopia Progression in Children

Department of Optometry and Vision Science, New Zealand National Eye Centre, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Ophthalmology (Impact Factor: 6.17). 06/2011; 118(6):1152-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.10.035
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To test the efficacy of an experimental Dual-Focus (DF) soft contact lens in reducing myopia progression.
Prospective, randomized, paired-eye control, investigator-masked trial with cross-over.
Forty children, 11-14 years old, with mean spherical equivalent refraction (SER) of -2.71 ± 1.10 diopters (D).
Dual-Focus lenses had a central zone that corrected refractive error and concentric treatment zones that created 2.00 D of simultaneous myopic retinal defocus during distance and near viewing. Control was a single vision distance (SVD) lens with the same parameters but without treatment zones. Children wore a DF lens in 1 randomly assigned eye and an SVD lens in the fellow eye for 10 months (period 1). Lens assignment was then swapped between eyes, and lenses were worn for a further 10 months (period 2).
Primary outcome was change in SER measured by cycloplegic autorefraction over 10 months. Secondary outcome was a change in axial eye length (AXL) measured by partial coherence interferometry over 10 months. Accommodation wearing DF lenses was assessed using an open-field autorefractor.
In period 1, the mean change in SER with DF lenses (-0.44 ± 0.33 D) was less than with SVD lenses (-0.69 ± 0.38 D; P < 0.001); mean increase in AXL was also less with DF lenses (0.11 ± 0.09 mm) than with SVD lenses (0.22 ± 0.10 mm; P < 0.001). In 70% of the children, myopia progression was reduced by 30% or more in the eye wearing the DF lens relative to that wearing the SVD lens. Similar reductions in myopia progression and axial eye elongation were also observed with DF lens wear during period 2. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity with DF lenses were not significantly different than with SVD lenses. Accommodation to a target at 40 cm was driven through the central distance-correction zone of the DF lens.
Dual-Focus lenses provided normal acuity and contrast sensitivity and allowed accommodation to near targets. Myopia progression and eye elongation were reduced significantly in eyes wearing DF lenses. The data suggest that sustained myopic defocus, even when presented to the retina simultaneously with a clear image, can act to slow myopia progression without compromising visual function.
Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: To evaluate the impact of eye and head rotation in the measurement of peripheral refraction with an open-field autorefractometer in myopic eyes wearing two different center-distance designs of multifocal contact lenses (MFCLs). Methods: Nineteen right eyes from 19 myopic patients (average central M +/- SD = -2.67 +/- 1.66 D) aged 20-27 years (mean +/- SD = 23.2 +/- 3.3 years) were evaluated using a Grand-Seiko autorefractometer. Patients were fitted with one multifocal aspheric center-distance contact lens (Biofinity Multifocal D (R)) and with one multi-concentric MFCL (Acuvue Oasys for Presbyopia). Axial and peripheral refraction were evaluated by eye rotation and by head rotation under naked eye condition and with each MFCL fitted randomly and in independent sessions. Results: For the naked eye, refractive pattern (M, JO and J45) across the central 60 degrees of the horizontal visual field values did not show significant changes measured by rotating the eye or rotating the head (p > 0.05). Similar results were obtained wearing the Biofinity D, for both testing methods, no obtaining significant differences to M, JO and J45 values (p > 0.05). For Acuvue Oasys for presbyopia, also no differences were found when comparing measurements obtained by eye and head rotation (p > 0.05). Multivariate analysis did not showed a significant interaction between testing method and lens type neither with measuring locations (MANOVA, p > 0.05). There were significant differences in M and JO values between naked eyes and each MFCL. Conclusion: Measurements of peripheral refraction by rotating the eye or rotating the head in myopic patients wearing dominant design or multi-concentric multifocal silicone hydrogel contact lens are comparable.
    Contact Lens & Anterior Eye 12/2014; 38(2). DOI:10.1016/j.clae.2014.11.201 · 2.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To evaluate the performance of two experimental contact lenses (CL) designed to induce relative peripheral myopic defocus in myopic eyes. Methods Ten right eyes of 10 subjects were fitted with three different CL: a soft experimental lens (ExpSCL), a rigid gas permeable experimental lens (ExpRGP) and a standard RGP lens made of the same material (StdRGP). Central and peripheral refraction was measured using a Grand Seiko open-field autorefractometer across the central 60° of the horizontal visual field. Ocular aberrations were measured with a Hartman-Shack aberrometer, and monocular contrast sensitivity function (CSF) was measured with a VCTS6500 without and with the three contact lenses. Results Both experimental lenses were able to increase significantly the relative peripheral myopic defocus up to −0.50 D in the nasal field and −1.00 D in the temporal field (p < 0.05). The ExpRGP induced a significantly higher myopic defocus in the temporal field compared to the ExpSCL. ExpSCL induced significantly lower levels of Spherical-like HOA than ExpRGP for the 5 mm pupil size (p < 0.05). Both experimental lenses kept CSF within normal limits without any statistically significant change from baseline (p > 0.05). Conclusions RGP lens design seems to be more effective to induce a significant myopic change in the relative peripheral refractive error. Both lenses preserve a good visual performance. The worsened optical quality observed in ExpRGP was due to an increased coma-like and spherical-like HOA. However, no impact on the visual quality as measured by CSF was observed.
    Contact Lens & Anterior Eye 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.clae.2014.08.001 · 2.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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. 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. 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) ( and ( 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. 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. 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. 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). 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.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2011; DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004916.pub3 · 5.94 Impact Factor