Visual Performance and High-Order Aberrations with Different Contact Lens Prototypes with Potential for Myopia Control

Martins, Catarina; Amorim‐de‐Sousa, Ana; Faria‐Ribeiro, Miguel; Pauné, Jaume; González-Meijóme, José Manuel; Queirós, António

doi:10.1080/02713683.2019.1645182

Cited by 20 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, direct comparison with other investigations is not possible, although previous studies have compared other multifocal and monofocal contact lenses. 15,22,23 Visual acuity and stereopsis…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 A period of 15 min was allowed between contact lenses. 14,15 Over-refraction, visual acuity and stereopsis Over-refraction was assessed objectively using an open field binocular autorefractor (Grand Seiko Autorefractometer WAM-5500, www.grandseiko.com) and then adjusted subjectively with spherical lenses using the end-point criterion of maximum plus for best VA. 8 If no over-refraction was needed, a plano lens was inserted so that all patients were assessed under the same conditions. Best-corrected photopic VA at distance was assessed using the chart 1 of Logarithmic Visual Acuity Chart 2000 (www.precision-vision.c om).…”

Section: Contact Lensesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of short‐term light disturbance, optical and visual performance outcomes between a myopia control contact lens and a single‐vision contact lens

García‐Marqués

Macedo-de-Araújo

Cerviño

et al. 2020

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contact Lensesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of short‐term light disturbance, optical and visual performance outcomes between a myopia control contact lens and a single‐vision contact lens

García‐Marqués

Macedo-de-Araújo

Cerviño

et al. 2020

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ese complaints could worsen as the children evolve into young-adults, and they are exposed to situations where these complaints might be more noticeable with bifocal and multifocal contact lenses or even orthokeratology [128] such as night driving. ose results in the context of clinical trials as well as experimental studies conducted recently with different lens prototypes [129] reveal that for the pupil size of younger subjects, distance visual performance could not be compromised as measured with visual acuity charts as long as the lens preserves a significant proportion of the optic zone devoted to distance vision focus. ese findings are compatible with the simulations presented in Figure 2(b) such that better distance performance is warranted for larger pupil sizes with the lens specifically designed for myopia control in children (dual-focus, MiSight, Coopervision).…”

Section: Visual Acuity and Dysphotopsiamentioning

confidence: 89%

Bifocal and Multifocal Contact Lenses for Presbyopia and Myopia Control

Remón

Pérez-Merino

Macedo-de-Araújo

et al. 2020

Journal of Ophthalmology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bifocal and multifocal optical devices are intended to get images into focus from objects placed at different distances from the observer. Spectacles, contact lenses, and intraocular lenses can meet the requirements to provide such a solution. Contact lenses provide unique characteristics as a platform for implementing bifocality and multifocality. Compared to spectacles, they are closer to the eye, providing a wider field of view, less distortion, and their use is more consistent as they are not so easily removed along the day. In addition, contact lenses are also minimally invasive, can be easily exchangeable, and, therefore, suitable for conditions in which surgical procedures are not indicated. Contact lenses can remain centered with the eye despite eye movements, providing the possibility for simultaneous imaging from different object distances. The main current indications for bifocal and multifocal contact lenses include presbyopia correction in adult population and myopia control in children. Considering the large numbers of potential candidates for optical correction of presbyopia and the demographic trends in myopia, the potential impact of contact lenses for presbyopia and myopia applications is undoubtedly tremendous. However, the ocular characteristics and expectations vary significantly between young and older candidates and impose different challenges in fitting bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for the correction of presbyopia and myopia control. This review presents the recent developments in material platforms, optical designs, simulated visual performance, and the clinical performance assessment of bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for presbyopia correction and/or myopia progression control.

show abstract

“…Other studies previously have evaluated the aberrations and the light disturbance induced by wearing CL designed for myopia control. 22,32 Center-distance design MFCL, which were previously considered favorable to myopia control by producing peripheral relative myopia, were evaluated by several authors such as Fedtke et al 33 MFCL were shown to signi cantly induce positive shifts in primary SA (4th order SA), whose absolute value increased according to the increase of pupil size and add power. Dual-focus designed lenses also produced positive SA in 3 mm pupil size, but conversely, in greater pupil sizes of 4 mm, a higher negative value of 4th order SA was found, and even more so in the 5 mm pupil size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…20,21 Despite obvious bene ts provided by MFCL in controlling eye elongation, there could be expected to be different in uences at the level of induction of ocular aberrations, depending on MFCL design. [22][23][24] In terms of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), MiSight has recently been shown to provide satisfactory visual acuity at both long and short distance. 25 Based on the above-mentioned facts, the present study consists of comparing the aberrations in the eyes of children randomly allocated to: 1) a control group using single-vision (SV) spectacles, and 2) a study group in which children wore a myopia control MiSight lens over a period of 24-months.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Lopes-Ferreira

Ruiz-Pomeda

Pérez-Sánchez

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo 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.MethodsChildren aged 8 to 12 years, with myopia (-0.75 to -4.00 D sphere) and astigmatism (< -1.00 D cylinder), were assigned to the lens study group (MiSight) or the control group (single-vision spectacles). Axial length (AL) was measured by biometry, corneal RMS (RMS_C), corneal high order RMS (HO_RMS_C), corneal low order RMS (LO_RMS_C), ocular total RMS (RMS_T), ocular total high order RMS (HO_RMS_T), ocular total low order RMS (LO_RMS_T), corneal spherical aberration (SA_C) and ocular total SA (SA_T) were calculated by aberrometric measures at the baseline, and on 12- 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.ResultsSeventy-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). In the control group, axial length changed significantly (0.444 ± 0.049 mm, p < 0.001) after 2 years. Also RMS_T (0.565 ± 0.199 µm, p = 0.029) and LO_RMS_T (0.461 ± 0.175 µm, p = 0.047) registered significant changes after 24-months in the control group. In the MiSight group, only axial length changed significantly (0.284 ± 0.025 mm, p < 0.001) after 2 years. The SA_C and SA_T did not reveal significant changes between visits or between groups.ConclusionsThe wear of MiSight CL did not induce significant changes in aberrations in anterior cornea and contrary of control group the total ocular RMS and low order RMS did not significantly caused by significantly lower eye growth and myopia progression,Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01917110.

show abstract

Visual Performance and High-Order Aberrations with Different Contact Lens Prototypes with Potential for Myopia Control

Cited by 20 publications

References 27 publications

Comparison of short‐term light disturbance, optical and visual performance outcomes between a myopia control contact lens and a single‐vision contact lens

Comparison of short‐term light disturbance, optical and visual performance outcomes between a myopia control contact lens and a single‐vision contact lens

Bifocal and Multifocal Contact Lenses for Presbyopia and Myopia Control

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About