Comparison of Administration of 0.02% Atropine and Orthokeratology for Myopia Control

Comparison of 0.02% atropine eye drops, peripheral myopia defocus design spectacle lenses, and orthokeratology for myopia control

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There are many methods to control the progression of myopia. However, it is currently unknown which method could better control myopia progression: 0.02% atropine eye drops, peripheral myopic defocus design spectacle lenses (PMDSL), or orthokeratology (OK).

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy of 0.02% atropine, PMDSL, and OK to control axial length (AL) elongation in children with myopia.

METHODS

This study was analysed based on a previous cohort study (0.02% atropine group) and retrospective data (PMDSL and OK group). Overall, 387 children aged 6-14 years with myopia - 1.00D to - 6.00D in the three groups were divided into four subgroups according to age and spherical equivalent refraction (SER). The primary outcome was changed in AL over 1-year.

RESULTS

The mean axial elongation was 0.30 ± 0.21 mm, 0.23 ± 0.16 mm, and 0.17 ± 0.19 mm in the 0.02% atropine, PMDSL, and OK groups, respectively. Multivariate linear regression analyses showed significant differences in axial elongation among the three groups, especially in children aged 6-10, but not in children aged 10.1-14; the corresponding axial elongation was 0.35 ± 0.21 mm, 0.23 ± 0.17 mm, and 0.21 ± 0.20 mm (P < 0.05 between any two groups, except between PMDSL and OK groups at P > 0.05) and 0.22 ± 0.20 mm, 0.21 ± 0.13 mm, and 0.13 ± 0.18 mm (P < 0.05 between any two groups, except between 0.02% atropine and PMDSL groups at P > 0.05) in children with SER from - 1.00D to - 3.00D and from - 3.01D to - 6.00D, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this study design and using only the current brand of PMDSL, OK appeared to be the best method, followed by PMDSL and then 0.02% atropine, for controlling AL elongation over one year. However, different effects were found in the various age and SER subgroups.

Axial Length Control Is Associated With a Choroidal Thickness Increase in Myopic Adolescents After Orthokeratology

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the changes in choroidal thickness and axial length after orthokeratology in adolescents with low-to-moderate myopia and to explore the relationship between choroidal thickness and axial length variation.

METHODS

Thirty eyes with low-to-moderate myopia were retrospectively studied, and optometric data were collected before and after 6 months of continuous orthokeratology. Axial length and choroidal and foveal thicknesses were measured using optical biometry and enhanced depth imaging-spectral domain optical coherence tomography, respectively.

RESULTS

Axial length in the low myopia group increased ( P <0.001) after 6 months of orthokeratology, and the variation was greater than that in the moderate myopia group ( P <0.05). The subfoveal choroidal thickness in low and moderate myopia groups increased ( P <0.01), and the variation was greater in the moderate myopia group ( P <0.05). Choroidal thickness in all seven measured spots increased, with the variation of subfovea, nasal 1 mm to fovea, and temporal 1 mm to fovea being statistically significant ( P <0.001, P <0.05, and P <0.05). The change in axial length was negatively associated with subfoveal and average choroidal thicknesses ( P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

Adolescents with moderate myopia presented better axial length control after 6 months of orthokeratology. The choroidal thickness of low and moderate myopic eyes increased, and the variation was more significant in moderate myopic eyes. The axial length control effects can be associated with an increase in the subfoveal and average choroidal thickness.

Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Myopia is a common refractive error, where elongation of the eyeball causes distant objects to appear blurred. The increasing prevalence of myopia is a growing global public health problem, in terms of rates of uncorrected refractive error and significantly, an increased risk of visual impairment due to myopia-related ocular morbidity. Since myopia is usually detected in children before 10 years of age and can progress rapidly, interventions to slow its progression need to be delivered in childhood.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children using network meta-analysis (NMA). To generate a relative ranking of myopia control interventions according to their efficacy. To produce a brief economic commentary, summarising the economic evaluations assessing myopia control interventions in children. To maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE; Embase; and three trials registers. The search date was 26 February 2022.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of optical, pharmacological and environmental interventions for slowing myopia progression in children aged 18 years or younger. Critical outcomes were progression of myopia (defined as the difference in the change in spherical equivalent refraction (SER, dioptres (D)) and axial length (mm) in the intervention and control groups at one year or longer) and difference in the change in SER and axial length following cessation of treatment ('rebound').  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods. We assessed bias using RoB 2 for parallel RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes: change in SER and axial length at one and two years. Most comparisons were with inactive controls.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 64 studies that randomised 11,617 children, aged 4 to 18 years. Studies were mostly conducted in China or other Asian countries (39 studies, 60.9%) and North America (13 studies, 20.3%). Fifty-seven studies (89%) compared myopia control interventions (multifocal spectacles, peripheral plus spectacles (PPSL), undercorrected single vision spectacles (SVLs), multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCL), orthokeratology, rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGP); or pharmacological interventions (including high- (HDA), moderate- (MDA) and low-dose (LDA) atropine, pirenzipine or 7-methylxanthine) against an inactive control. Study duration was 12 to 36 months. The overall certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Since the networks in the NMA were poorly connected, most estimates versus control were as, or more, imprecise than the corresponding direct estimates. Consequently, we mostly report estimates based on direct (pairwise) comparisons below. At one year, in 38 studies (6525 participants analysed), the median change in SER for controls was -0.65 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (mean difference (MD) 0.90 D, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.18), MDA (MD 0.65 D, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.03), LDA (MD 0.38 D, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.66), pirenzipine (MD 0.32 D, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.49), MFSCL (MD 0.26 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.35), PPSLs (MD 0.51 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82), and multifocal spectacles (MD 0.14 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21). By contrast, there was little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.07 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.24) or undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.15 D, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00) reduce progression.  At two years, in 26 studies (4949 participants), the median change in SER for controls was -1.02 D. The following interventions may reduce SER progression compared to controls: HDA (MD 1.26 D, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36), MDA (MD 0.45 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83), LDA (MD 0.24 D, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.31), pirenzipine (MD 0.41 D, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.69), MFSCL (MD 0.30 D, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41), and multifocal spectacles  (MD 0.19 D, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30). PPSLs (MD 0.34 D, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.76) may also reduce progression, but the results were inconsistent. For RGP, one study found a benefit and another found no difference with control. We found no difference in SER change for undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.02 D, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.09). At one year, in 36 studies (6263 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.31 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.30), MDA (MD -0.28 mm, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.17), LDA (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.05), orthokeratology (MD -0.19 mm, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.15), MFSCL (MD -0.11 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.09), pirenzipine (MD -0.10 mm, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02), PPSLs (MD -0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.03), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.06 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.04). We found little or no evidence that RGP (MD 0.02 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10), 7-methylxanthine (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.03) or undercorrected SVLs (MD 0.05 mm, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.11) reduce axial length. At two years, in 21 studies (4169 participants), the median change in axial length for controls was 0.56 mm. The following interventions may reduce axial elongation compared to controls: HDA (MD -0.47mm, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.34), MDA (MD -0.33 mm, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.20), orthokeratology (MD -0.28 mm, (95% CI -0.38 to -0.19), LDA (MD -0.16 mm, 95% CI -0.20 to  -0.12), MFSCL (MD -0.15 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.12), and multifocal spectacles (MD -0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.03). PPSL may reduce progression (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.05) but results were inconsistent. We found little or no evidence that undercorrected SVLs (MD -0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.03) or RGP (MD 0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12) reduce axial length. There was inconclusive evidence on whether treatment cessation increases myopia progression. Adverse events and treatment adherence were not consistently reported, and only one study reported quality of life. No studies reported environmental interventions reporting progression in children with myopia, and no economic evaluations assessed interventions for myopia control in children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies mostly compared pharmacological and optical treatments to slow the progression of myopia with an inactive comparator. Effects at one year provided evidence that these interventions may slow refractive change and reduce axial elongation, although results were often heterogeneous. A smaller body of evidence is available at two or three years, and uncertainty remains about the sustained effect of these interventions. Longer-term and better-quality studies comparing myopia control interventions used alone or in combination are needed, and improved methods for monitoring and reporting adverse effects.

Low-Concentration Atropine Monotherapy vs. Combined with MiSight 1 Day Contact Lenses for Myopia Management

Objectives: To assess the decrease in myopia progression and rebound effect using topical low-dose atropine compared to a combined treatment with contact lenses for myopic control. Methods: This retrospective review study included 85 children aged 10.34 ± 2.27 (range 6 to 15.5) who were followed over three years. All had a minimum myopia increase of 1.00 D the year prior to treatment. The children were divided into two treatment groups and a control group. One treatment group included 29 children with an average prescription of 4.81 ± 2.12 D (sphere equivalent (SE) range of 1.25−10.87 D), treated with 0.01% atropine for two years (A0.01%). The second group included 26 children with an average prescription of 4.14 ± 1.35 D (SE range of 1.625−6.00 D), treated with MiSight 1 day dual focus contact lenses (DFCL) and 0.01% atropine (A0.01% + DFCL) for two years. The control group included 30 children wearing single-vision spectacles (SV), averaging −5.06 ± 1.77 D (SE) range 2.37−8.87 D). Results: There was an increase in the SE myopia progression in the SV group of 1.19 ± 0.43 D, 1.25 ± 0.52 D, and 1.13 ± 0.36 D in the first, second, and third years, respectively. Myopia progression in the A0.01% group was 0.44 ± 0.21 D (p < 0.01) and 0.51 ± 0.39 D (p < 0.01) in the first and second years, respectively. In the A0.01% + DFCL group, myopia progression was 0.35 ± 0.26 D and 0.44 ± 0.40 D in the first and second years, respectively (p < 0.01). Half a year after the cessation of the atropine treatment, myopia progression (rebound effect) was measured at −0.241 ± 0.35 D and −0.178 ± 0.34 D in the A0.01% and A0.01% + DFCL groups, respectively. Conclusions: Monotherapy low-dose atropine, combined with peripheral blur contact lenses, was clinically effective in decreasing myopia progression. A low rebound effect was found after the therapy cessation. In this retrospective study, combination therapy did not present an advantage over monotherapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Consecutive Use of 1% and 0.01% Atropine for Myopia Control in Chinese Children: The Atropine for Children and Adolescent Myopia Progression Study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of consecutive use of 1% and 0.01% atropine compared with 0.01% atropine alone over 1 year.

METHODS

A total of 207 participants aged 6-12 years with myopia of - 0.50 to - 6.00 D in both eyes were enrolled in this randomized, controlled, non-masked trial and randomly assigned (1:1) to groups A and B. Group A received 1% atropine weekly and were tapered to 0.01% atropine daily at the 6-month visit, and group B received 0.01% atropine daily for 1 year.

RESULTS

Of the 207 participants, 109 were female (52.7%) and the mean (± standard deviation) age was 8.92 ± 1.61 years. Ninety-one participants (87.5%) in group A and 80 participants (77.7%) in group B completed the 1-year treatment. Group A exhibited less refraction progression (- 0.53 ± 0.49 D vs. - 0.74 ± 0.52 D; P = 0.01) and axial elongation (0.26 ± 0.17 mm vs. 0.36 ± 0.21 mm; P < 0.001) over 1 year compared with group B. The changes in refraction (- 0.82 ± 0.45 D vs. - 0.46 ± 0.35 D; P < 0.001) and axial length (0.29 ± 0.12 mm vs. 0.17 ± 0.11 mm; P < 0.001) during the second 6 months in group A were greater than those in group B, with 72.5% of participants presenting refraction rebound. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The 1-year results preliminarily suggest that consecutive use of 1% and 0.01% atropine confers an overall better effect in slowing myopia progression than 0.01% atropine alone, despite myopia rebound after the concentration switch. Both regimens were well tolerated. The long-term efficacy and rebound after the concentration switch and regimen optimization warrant future studies to determine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinical Trials.gov PRS (Registration No. NCT03949101).

Comparison of the Effects of Orthokeratology Lens and Cyclopentolate on Myopia Progression in Children

Purpose: To compare the effects of orthokeratology lens (Ortho‐K lens) and topical cyclopentolate on myopia progression in children. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed the medical records of 36 children who received Ortho‐K lens and 28 who received cyclopentolate (i.e., total of 64 eyes). The following data were recorded: sex, age, age at first intervention, follow‐up duration, and visual acuity and axial length (AL) at the time of first treatment and after 6, 12, and 24 months of treatment. Results: In the Ortho‐K group, the changes of AL significantly decreased by 0.3 ± 0.25 mm at 12 months and 0.52 ± 0.34 mm at 24 months (p for trend < 0.001). In the cyclopentolate group, the changes of AL significantly decreased by 0.36 ± 0.17 mm at 12 months and 0.62 ± 0.29 mm at 24 months (p for trend = 0.022). Compared to the use of cyclopentolate, the use of Ortho‐K lens resulted in smaller changes in AL during follow‐up (p = 0.038). Conclusions: In myopic children, Ortho‐K reduced myopia progression, whereas cyclopentolate significantly less affect myopia progression than Ortho‐K lens.

Orthokeratology Lenses Versus Administration of 0.01% Atropine Eye Drops for Axial Length Elongation in Children With Myopic Anisometropia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of orthokeratology (OK) lenses and that of 0.01% atropine eye drops on axial length (AL) elongation in children with myopic anisometropia.

METHODS

Ninety-five children with myopic anisometropia who used OK lenses (N=49) or 0.01% atropine eye drops (N=46) were enrolled in this retrospective 1-year study. For all children, the eyes with higher spherical equivalent refractive error (SER) were assigned to the H-eye subgroup, whereas the fellow eyes with lower SER were assigned to the L-eye subgroup.

RESULTS

After 1-year treatment, the mean change in the AL of H eyes and L eyes in the OK lenses group was 0.18±0.16 mm and 0.24±0.15 mm, respectively (P=0.15), and 0.28±0.20 mm and 0.25±0.18 mm, respectively (P=0.48), in the 0.01% atropine group. Multivariate regression analyses showed significant differences in AL change between H and L eyes after treatment with OK lens (P=0.03), whereas no significant difference in the 0.01% atropine (P=0.22). The change in the AL in the H-eye group was less with OK lenses than with 0.01% atropine (P=0.04), whereas there was no significant difference between the change in AL in the L-eye group between treatment with OK lens and 0.01% atropine (P=0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

In myopic anisometropic children, AL differences between 2 eyes decrease by wearing OK lenses but do not change after administration of 0.01% atropine eye drops. The increased effect of OK lenses, but not 0.01% atropine, in reducing axial elongation at 1 year in the eye with higher SER in anisometropic children warrants further investigation.

Corneal Penetration of Low-Dose Atropine Eye Drops

Major studies demonstrating the inhibition of myopia in children and juveniles by low-dose atropine eye drops provide little information on the manufacturing process and the exact composition of the atropine dilutions. However, corneal penetration might significantly vary depending on preservatives, such as benzalkonium chloride (BAC), and the atropine concentration. Since there is a trade-off between side effects, stability, and optimal effects of atropine on myopia, it is important to gain better knowledge about intraocular atropine concentrations. We performed an ex vivo study to determine corneal penetration for different formulations. Atropine drops (0.01%) of different formulations were obtained from pharmacies and applied to the cornea of freshly enucleated pig eyes. After 10 min, a sample of aqueous humor was taken and atropine concentrations were determined after liquid–liquid extraction followed by high-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The variability that originated from variations in applied drop size exceeded the differences between preserved and preservative-free formulations. The atropine concentration in the anterior chamber measured after 10 min was only 3.8 × 10⁻⁸ of its concentration in the applied eye drops, corresponding to 502.4 pM. Obviously, the preservative did not facilitate corneal penetration, at least ex vivo. In the aqueous humor of children’s eyes, similar concentrations, including higher variability, may be expected in the lower therapeutic window of pharmacodynamic action.

The Combined Effect of Low-dose Atropine with Orthokeratology in Pediatric Myopia Control: Review of the Current Treatment Status for Myopia

Pediatric myopia has become a major international public health concern. The prevalence of myopia has undergone a significant increase worldwide. The purpose of this review of the current literature was to evaluate the peer-reviewed scientific literature on the efficacy and safety of low-dose atropine treatment combined with overnight orthokeratology for myopia control. A search was conducted in Pubmed and Web of Science with the following search strategy: (atropine OR low-dose atropine OR 0.01% atropine) AND (orthokeratology OR ortho-k) AND (myopia control OR myopia progression). All included studies improved myopia control by the synergistic effect of orthokeratology with low-dose atropine, compared with orthokeratology treatment alone. All studies included a short or medium follow-up period; therefore longer-term studies are necessary to validate these results.