Daily Wear Contact Lenses Manufactured in Etafilcon A Are Noninferior to Two Silicone Hydrogel Lens Types With Respect to Hypoxic Stress

Silicone hydrogel versus hydrogel soft contact lenses for differences in patient-reported eye comfort and safety

BACKGROUND

Ocular discomfort is the leading cause of permanent discontinuation of soft contact lens (SCL) wear. Silicone hydrogel and hydrogel materials are the two major categories of SCLs, with silicone hydrogel materials being newer and more breathable than hydrogel materials. Whether comfort is associated with SCL material is controversial despite numerous studies. Similarly, the difference between these materials in terms of safety outcomes (e.g. frequency of microbial keratitis) is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of silicone hydrogel compared with hydrogel SCLs on self-reported comfort, dry eye test results, and adverse events in SCL-wearing adults 18 years of age or older.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Eyes and Vision Information Specialist searched the electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). There were no restrictions on language or date of publication. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, including the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2022, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase.com, PubMed, LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database), ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We also searched the reference lists of identified studies, review articles, and guidelines for information about relevant studies that may not have been identified by our search strategy. Furthermore, we contacted investigators regarding ongoing trials. The most recent database search was conducted on 24 June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Our search selection criteria included RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and cross-over RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We applied standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven parallel-group RCTs conducted in the USA, the UK, Australia, Germany, India, and Turkey. A total of 1371 participants were randomized. The duration of SCL wear ranged from one to 52 weeks. Study characteristics and risk of bias The median number of participants per trial was 120 (interquartile range: 51 to 314), and the average age ranged from 20.7 to 33.0 years. Women represented the majority of participants (range 55% to 74.9%; 5 RCTs). Collectively, the included trials compared eight different silicone hydrogel SCLs with three different hydrogel SCLs. Five trials compared daily disposable SCLs, and two compared extended wear SCLs (worn for seven days and six nights). New SCL wearers were enrolled in three trials. Two trials included both new and established SCL wearers, and two trials did not report participants' history of SCL use. Five trials were sponsored by industry. We judged the overall risk of bias to be 'high' or 'some concerns' for the safety and efficacy outcomes. Findings One trial reported Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) results, with the evidence being very uncertain about the effects of SCL material on OSDI scores (mean difference -1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.49 to 8.09; 1 RCT, 47 participants; very low certainty evidence). Three trials reported visual analog scale comfort score results, with no clear difference in comfort between materials, but the evidence was of very low certainty; trial results could not be combined because the three trials reported results at different time points. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of SCL material on discontinuation of contact lens wear (risk ratio [RR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.74; 1 RCT, 248 participants). None of the included trials reported Contact Lens Dry Eye Questionnaire (CLDEQ-8) or Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) scores. There was no evidence of a clinically meaningful difference (> 0.5 unit) between daily disposable silicone hydrogel and hydrogel SCLs in corneal staining, conjunctival staining, or conjunctival redness (very low certainty evidence). Adverse events Very low certainty evidence from two trials comparing daily disposable SCLs suggested no evidence of a difference between lens materials in the risk of vision-threatening adverse events at one to four weeks (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.51; 2 RCTs, 368 participants). Two trials comparing extended wear SCLs indicated that hydrogel SCLs may have a 2.03 times lower risk of adverse events at 52 weeks compared with silicone hydrogel SCLs (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.99; 815 participants), but the certainty of evidence was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The overall evidence for a difference between all included silicone hydrogel and hydrogel SCLs was of very low certainty, with most trials at high overall risk of bias. The majority of studies did not assess comfort using a validated instrument. There was insufficient evidence to support recommending one SCL material over the other. For extended wear, hydrogel SCL may have a lower risk of adverse events at 52 weeks compared to silicon hydrogel. Future well-designed trials are needed to generate high certainty evidence to further clarify differences in SCL material comfort and safety.

Addressing common myths and misconceptions in soft contact lens practice

Advances in contact lens technology over the past 50 years since the commercialisation of the first soft lenses in 1971 have been incredible, with significant changes in contact lens materials, frequency of replacement, care systems and lens designs occurring. However, despite the widespread availability of contact lenses, penetration rates for those who need vision correction remain in the low single digits and many practitioners seem to hold on to concepts around the potential value of contact lenses that appear based in the dim and distant past and are certainly no longer valid today. This review addresses 10 common 'myths and misconceptions' around soft contact lenses using an evidence-based approach that can hopefully dispel some of these incorrect assumptions.

Clinical Comparison of a Silicone Hydrogel and a Conventional Hydrogel Daily Disposable Contact Lens

Purpose

To compare the subjective performances of verofilcon A daily disposable silicone hydrogel contact lenses (CLs) and etafilcon A hydrogel CLs.

Methods

Successful wearers of spherical soft CLs for distance correction were prospectively randomized to wear verofilcon A or etafilcon A lenses for 1 week and crossed over to the alternative lenses. The primary study objective was a comparison of distance visual acuity (VA). Exploratory endpoints included subjective overall lens preference (5-point scale) and subjective ratings (10-point scales) of end-of-day (EOD) vision, overall handling, insertion comfort, EOD comfort, overall quality of vision, overall comfort, vision throughout the day, lens handling at insertion, and lens handling at removal.

Results

Of 92 subjects (184 eyes), 46 each were randomized to verofilcon A or etafilcon A lenses and subsequently crossed over to the other lenses. Evaluation of distance VA showed that verofilcon A lenses were noninferior to etafilcon A lenses. Comparison of lens preference showed that 68 (73.9%) subjects somewhat or strongly preferred verofilcon A lenses, whereas 21 (22.9%) somewhat or strongly preferred etafilcon A lenses (p<0.0001). Mean ± SD ratings of EOD vision (8.6±1.5 vs 7.7±1.9), overall handling (8.7±1.5 vs 6.9±2.3), insertion comfort (9.2±1.0 vs 7.7±1.9), and EOD comfort (8.0±1.9 vs 7.0±2.2) were all significantly (p≤0.0001 each) higher for verofilcon A than for etafilcon A lenses. Mean ± SD ratings of overall quality of vision (8.9±1.2 vs 8.2±1.8), overall comfort (8.6±1.5 vs 7.4±1.8), vision throughout the day (8.9±1.3 vs 8.1±1.8), lens handling at insertion (9.0±1.4 vs 6.9±2.5), and lens handling at removal (8.3±2.1 vs 7.7±2.2) were also significantly higher for verofilcon A lenses. No subject experienced any ocular adverse events.

Conclusion

After 1 week of wear, the study population reported that ratings for subjective endpoints were significantly higher for verofilcon A lenses than for etafilcon A lenses.

Tear hypoxia-inducible factor-1α expression, lactate dehydrogenase, and malate dehydrogenase activity changes in soft contact lens wear

BACKGROUND Soft contact lens (SCL) wear can lead to a corneal hypoxia. However, there is a lack of studies looking for corneal hypoxia biomarkers in tear. This study aimed to investigate corneal hypoxia among SCL wearers based on hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) expression, tear lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and malate dehydrogenase (MDH) activities. METHODS A nonrandomized clinical trial was conducted on two groups. SCLs were prescribed for 2 months to a group of new wearers. Meanwhile, SCL wear was discontinued for 1 month in a group of long-term wearers. Tear samples were then collected on days 1, 7, 14, 28, and 56 after treatment. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and Friedman’s test with post-hoc statistical analysis were used to evaluate biomolecular changes (HIF-1α concentration, LDH, and MDH activities) in both groups. RESULTS A total of 14 subjects (28 eyes) were enrolled in each group. In new wearers, there was a significant decrease in MDH level (p = 0.010) and no effect on HIF-1α level. In long-term wearers, HIF-1α and LDH levels tended to decrease (p = 0.054). A significant decrease on MDH level was noted on days 7 (p = 0.003), 14 (p = 0.026), and 28 (p<0.010). Long-term wearers had a higher LDH baseline level than new wearers (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS Corneal hypoxia was not proven after 2 months of SCL wear using biomarkers. However, LDH and MDH activities in tears were found to be decline after SCL discontinuation.

Thirty years of 'quiet eye' with etafilcon A contact lenses

Frequent replacement contact lenses made from the etafilcon A hydrogel lens material were introduced onto the market over 30 years ago, and etafilcon A remains the most widely used hydrogel lens material today. Although the prescribing of silicone hydrogel lenses is increasing, millions of lens wearers globally have been wearing hydrogel lenses for many years and exhibit a physiologically-stable 'quiet eye', with a low profile of adverse events. Hydrogel lenses are demonstrated to maintain a low inflammatory response and infection risk profile during daily wear, which in the case of etafilcon A, may be related to its low modulus, and the naturally-protective, anti-microbial, non-denatured lysozyme absorbed into the lens from the tear fluid. Although improved corneal physiology from decreased hypoxia with silicone hydrogel lenses is well accepted, equivalent levels of corneal oxygenation are maintained during daily wear of low to medium powered hydrogel lenses, which do not impede the daily corneal de-swelling process, and do not induce clinically significant changes in ocular health. Therefore, hydrogel lenses remain an important alternative for daily wear in modern contact lens practice.

Silicone hydrogel daily disposable benefits: The evidence

Daily disposable (DD) contact lenses first came to the market approximately 25 years ago and eye care professionals (ECPs) started prescribing silicone hydrogel (SiH) contact lenses, primarily for extended or continuous wear, approximately 20 years ago. It has now been over ten years since SiH DD contact lenses have been available, and while SiH materials are routinely prescribed by ECPs for reusable daily wear, hydrogel materials are still frequently selected for the DD modality of contact lens wear. This article reviews the evidence to support the benefits of both a DD modality and SiH materials and how patients' needs may be met with SiH DD contact lenses, with respect to clinical performance, health outcomes, satisfaction, compliance and convenience. Factors which may enable or constrain ECPs from prescribing SiH DD contact lenses, as opposed to hydrogel DD and reusable contact lenses, for more of their patients are discussed with the objective of providing ECPs with a greater understanding of the advantages that can be afforded by prescribing SiH DD contact lenses to both their new and existing contact lens wearers.

Anterior segment optical coherence tomography scanning protocols and corneal thickness repeatability

PURPOSE

To examine the influence of anterior segment optical coherence tomography imaging protocols on the intraobserver and intrasession repeatability of epithelial, stromal, and total corneal thickness measurements.

METHODS

Repeated anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) images (Spectralis, Heidelberg) were obtained from 15 adults using single 8.3 mm wide horizontal line scans with an average of 2, 10, 20, 30, 50 and 100 B-scans. Volumetric scans consisting of nine 8.3 mm horizontal line scans encompassing a 1.3 mm vertical region were also captured (with 20 B-scans per line scan). Single point thickness measures (at the normal to the tangent of the anterior corneal surface) were compared with thickness measures averaged over the central 6 mm. The impact of B-scan averaging and intraobserver variability were examined for single line scans. For volumetric scans, the impact of the number of line scans upon intraobserver and intrasession variability were calculated.

RESULTS

Intraobserver repeatability did not vary significantly as a function of the number of averaged B-scans per line scan, but was lowest for 20-30 averaged B scans. For volumetric scans, increasing the number of line scans did increase scan duration (p < 0.001), with minimal impact upon the average scan quality index (p = 0.06). Averaging more than 3 line scans did not significantly improve intraobserver or intrasession repeatability for either single point or average thickness measurements.

CONCLUSION

AS-OCT volumetric scans with 3 lines each consisting of 20 B-scans with measurements averaged over a central 6 mm of the cornea provide highly repeatable measures of epithelial, stromal and total corneal thickness (95 % LoA ≤ ±3.2 μm for intraobserver repeatability and ≤ ±3.7 μm for intrasession repeatability). This scanning protocol can provide reliable information when monitoring subtle changes in corneal thickness.