PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
To investigate the change of refractive error between the full-correction and under-correction treatment groups of myopic anisometropic patients.
Methods
This study included 36 patients who had no amblyopia with myopic anisometropia > 3.00 diopters (D) and less than 6.00 D using the cycloplegic refraction test. The patients were divided into two groups involving the full-correction of both eyes (group 1) or full-correction on the less myopic eye and under-correction with −0.50 D of the more myopic eye (group 2). We monitored refractive changes every 6 months for 24 months.
Results
At the first visit, the mean refractive error of the less myopic eye was −0.68 ± 0.54 D and that of the more myopic eye was −4.22 ± 0.77 D in group 1. The mean refractive error of the less myopic eye was −0.75 ± 0.58 D and that of the more myopic eye was −4.36 ± 0.73 D in group 2. There was no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.713 and p = 0.585, respectively). At 24 months, the mean refractive errors of group 1 were −1.27 ± 0.54 D and −4.88 ± 0.81 D, respectively, and that of group 2 were 1.38 ± 0.54 D and −5.59 ± 1.01 D, respectively. The mean refractive error of the less myopic eyes showed no significant difference between both groups (p = 0.555), but that of the more myopic eyes was significantly different (p = 0.027). Between both groups, the degree of anisometropia at 24 months was 3.61 ± 0.60 in group 1 and 4.20 ± 0.86 in group 2. Group 2 showed a significant difference and more severe anisometropic changes (p = 0.022).
Figures and Tables
Figure 1
Changes in spherical equivalent refractive error of more myopic eyes. Full corrected patients (Group 1) were slower towards myopic progression than under corrected patients (Group 2). At 24 months, mean spherical equivalent was significantly difference between group 1 and group 2.
Figure 2
Changes in amount of anisometropia. Under corrected patients (Group 2) had more amount of anisometropia than full corrected patients (Group 1). At 24 months, there was significant difference between group 1 and group 2.
References
1. Wojciechowski R. Nature and nurture: the complex genetics of myopia and refractive error. Clin Genet. 2011; 79:301–320.
2. Lin LL, Shih YF, Hsiao CK, Chen CJ. Prevalence of myopia in Taiwanese schoolchildren: 1983 to 2000. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2004; 33:27–33.
3. He M, Zeng J, Liu Y, et al. Refractive error and visual impairment in urban children in southern china. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004; 45:793–799.
4. Lyu IJ, Kim MH, Baek SY, et al. The association between menarche and myopia: findings from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination, 2008-2012. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015; 56:4712–4718.
5. Chia A, Chua WH, Cheung YB, et al. Atropine for the treatment of childhood myopia: safety and efficacy of 0.5%, 0.1%, and 0.01% doses (Atropine for the Treatment of Myopia 2). Ophthalmology. 2012; 119:347–354.
6. Cho P, Cheung SW. Retardation of Myopia in Orthokeratology (ROMIO) study: a 2-Year randomized clinical trial. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012; 53:7077–7085.
7. Vasudevan B, Esposito C, Peterson C, et al. Under-correction of human myopia--is it myopigenic?: a retrospective analysis of clinical refraction data. J Optom. 2014; 7:147–152.
8. Guggenheim JA, Northstone K, McMahon G, et al. Time outdoors and physical activity as predictors of incident myopia in childhood: a prospective cohort study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012; 53:2856–2865.
9. Ip JM, Saw SM, Rose KA, et al. Role of near work in myopia: findings in a sample of Australian school children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008; 49:2903–2910.
10. Roberts CJ, Adams GG. Contact lenses in the management of high anisometropic amblyopia. Eye (Lond). 2002; 16:577–579.
11. Hung GK, Ciuffreda KJ. Quantitative analysis of the effect of near lens addition on accommodation and myopigenesis. Curr Eye Res. 2000; 20:293–312.
12. Jiang BC, Bussa S, Tea YC, Seger K. Optimal dioptric value of near addition lenses intended to slow myopic progression. Optom Vis Sci. 2008; 85:1100–1105.
13. Chung K, Mohidin N, O'Leary DJ. Undercorrection of myopia enhances rather than inhibits myopia progression. Vision Res. 2002; 42:2555–2559.
14. Adler D, Millodot M. The possible effect of undercorrection on myopic progression in children. Clin Exp Optom. 2006; 89:315–321.
15. Deng L, Gwiazda JE. Anisometropia in children from infancy to 15 years. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012; 53:3782–3787.
16. Pärssinen O. Anisometropia and changes in anisometropia in school myopia. Optom Vis Sci. 1990; 67:256–259.
17. Tong L, Chan YH, Gazzard G, et al. Longitudinal study of anisometropia in Singaporean school children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47:3247–3252.
18. Yamashita T, Watanabe S, Ohba N. A longitudinal study of cycloplegic refraction in a cohort of 350 Japanese schoolchildren. Anisometropia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1999; 19:30–33.
19. Pärssinen O, Kauppinen M. Anisometropia of spherical equivalent andastigmatism among myopes: a 23-year follow-up study of prevalence and changes from childhood to adulthood. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017; 95:518–524.
XML Download