Efficacy of Different Powers of Low-Level Red Light in Children for Myopia Control

Effects of short-term exposure to red or near-infrared light on axial length in young human subjects

PURPOSE

To determine whether visible light is needed to elicit axial eye shortening by exposure to long wavelength light.

METHODS

Incoherent narrow-band red (620 ± 10 nm) or near-infrared (NIR, 875 ± 30 nm) light was generated by an array of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and projected monocularly in 17 myopic and 13 non-myopic subjects for 10 min. The fellow eye was occluded. Light sources were positioned 50 cm from the eye in a dark room. Axial length (AL) was measured before and after the exposure using low-coherence interferometry.

RESULTS

Non-myopic subjects responded to red light with significant eye shortening, while NIR light induced minor axial elongation (-13.3 ± 17.3 μm vs. +6.5 ± 11.6 μm, respectively, p = 0.005). Only 41% of the myopic subjects responded to red light exposure with a decrease in AL and changes were therefore, on average, not significantly different from those observed with NIR light (+0.2 ± 12.1 μm vs. +1.1 ± 11.2 μm, respectively, p = 0.83). Interestingly, there was a significant correlation between refractive error and induced changes in AL after exposure to NIR light in myopic eyes (r(15) = -0.52, p = 0.03) and induced changes in AL after exposure to red light in non-myopic eyes (r(11) = 0.62, p = 0.02), with more induced axial elongation with increasing refractive error.

CONCLUSIONS

Incoherent narrow-band red light at 620 nm induced axial shortening in 77% of non-myopic and 41% of myopic eyes. NIR light did not induce any significant changes in AL in either refractive group, suggesting that the beneficial effect of red laser light therapy on myopia progression requires visible stimulation and not simply thermal energy.

Comparison of Changes in Retinal Vascular Density and Thickness After Using Low-Level Red Light and 0.01% Atropine in Premyopic Children

Purpose

To compare changes in superficial retinal vascular density (SRVD), deep retinal vascular density (DRVD), and retinal thickness (RT) of the macular zone after repeated low-level red light (RLRL) and 0.01% atropine exposure in premyopic schoolchildren.

Methods

Prospective randomized trial. Sixty-nine schoolchildren with cycloplegic refraction >-0.75 D and ≤0.50 D were randomly assigned to RLRL and 0.01% atropine groups. SRVD, DRVD, and RT were measured using swept-source optical coherence tomography at baseline and six months. The macular zone was divided into three concentric rings (fovea, parafovea, and perifovea) using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study.

Results

After six months, the whole, parafoveal, and perifoveal SRVD significantly increased in the two groups (all P < 0.05). Multivariate regression analyses showed that none of these changes varied significantly between the two groups (all P > 0.05), whereas foveal SRVD remained stable in both groups (all P > 0.05). In the RLRL group, the whole and perifoveal DRVD increased significantly (all P < 0.05), whereas no statistical difference was observed in the foveal and parafoveal DRVD. DRVD remained stable in the 0.01% atropine group (all P > 0.05). No significant differences were observed in RT changes between the two groups (all P > 0.05). In comparison, there were no significant changes in SRVD, DRVD, or RT after six months in the placebo group in our previous study.

Conclusions

SRVD increased similarly in the RLRL and 0.01% atropine groups, whereas DRVD increased only in the former group. There were no significant RT changes in either group after six months of treatment in premyopic schoolchildren.

Translational Relevance

This research observed the effects of low-level red light and 0.01% atropine on retinal vasculature, offering valuable insights into myopia progression prevention.

Red light instruments for myopia exceed safety limits

PURPOSE

Low-level red light (LLRL) therapy has recently emerged as a myopia treatment in children, with several studies reporting significant reduction in axial elongation and myopia progression. The goal of this study was to characterise the output and determine the thermal and photochemical maximum permissible exposure (MPE) of LLRL devices for myopia control.

METHODS

Two LLRL devices, a Sky-n1201a and a Future Vision, were examined. Optical power measurements were made using an integrating sphere radiometer through a 7-mm diameter aperture, in accordance with ANSI Z136.1-2014, sections 3.2.3-3.2.4. Retinal spot sizes of the devices were obtained using a model eye and high-resolution beam profiler. Corneal irradiance, retinal irradiance and MPE were calculated for an eye positioned at the oculars of each device.

RESULTS

Both devices were confirmed to be Class 1 laser products. Findings showed that the Sky-n1201a delivers laser light as a point source with a 654-nm wavelength, 0.2 mW power (Ø 7 mm aperture, 10-cm distance), 1.17 mW/cm2 corneal irradiance and 7.2 W/cm2 retinal irradiance (Ø 2 mm pupil). The MPE for photochemical damage is 0.55-7.0 s for 2-7 mm pupils and for thermal damage is 0.41-10 s for 4.25-7 mm pupils. Future Vision delivers the laser as an extended source subtending 0.75 × 0.325°. It has a 652-nm wavelength, 0.06 mW power (Ø 7 mm aperture, 10 cm distance), 0.624 mW/cm2 corneal irradiance and 0.08 W/cm2 retinal irradiance (Ø 2 mm pupil). MPE for photochemical damage is 50-625 s for 2-7 mm pupils.

DISCUSSION

For both of the LLRL devices evaluated here, 3 min of continuous viewing approached or surpassed the MPE, putting the retina at risk of photochemical and thermal damage. Clinicians should be cautious with the use of LLRL therapy for myopia in children until safety standards can be confirmed.