RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of MiSight 1 day soft contact lenses (MiSight CL) in Korean children with mild-to-moderate myopia. In addition, the study compared the effects of MiSight CL in children who had or had not previously used orthokeratology contact lenses (Ortho-K). METHODS: A total of 66 children aged 5 to 16 years, who were prescribed MiSight CL, were included in the study. Based on a myopia degree of -4 diopters (D), children were divided into mild and severe myopia groups to compare the effectiveness of myopia suppression. In addition, 55 eyes previously using Ortho-K were compared with 76 eyes using MiSight CL for the first time. RESULTS: The average follow-up period was 6.58±3.74 months. The average refractive value before using MiSight CL was 3.64±1.56 D, and there was no significant change in the final visit. Comparing myopia suppression between different degrees of myopia and previous use of Ortho-K lenses, there was no significant change in refractive error before and after using MiSight CL (unpaired t test, P>0.05). The main reason for Ortho-K failure was low visual acuity after correction. Regardless of Ortho-K history, children showed good visual acuity after wearing MiSight CL, and no other side effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: MiSight CL effectively inhibited the progression of myopia in Korean children with mild-to-moderate myopia. MiSight CL offer the advantage of easy application, making them a viable alternative when Ortho-K are not suitable.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare refractive deviations between in-the-bag insertion, trans-scleral ciliary sulcus fixation, ciliary sulcus insertion, and ciliary sulcus insertion with optic capture after phacovitrectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Single-unit, single-surgeon, retrospective study. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent phacovitrectomy and intraocular lens (IOL) out-of-the-bag insertion simultaneously were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent phacovitrectomy with IOL in-the-bag insertion were also included for comparison with those who underwent phacovitrectomy with out-of-the-bag insertion. Patients were classified into four groups based on the IOL insertion method. The average difference from the target spherical equivalent (SE) to postoperative SE was defined as the refractive deviation. Refractive deviations of the groups were compared. RESULTS: The refractive deviation for the in-the-bag insertion (43 eyes) was -0.18 ± 0.50 Df, -0.84 ± 0.81 D for the trans-scleral ciliary sulcus fixation (43 eyes), -0.93 ± 0.68 D for the ciliary sulcus insertion (25 eyes), and -0.27 ± 0.50 D for the ciliary sulcus insertion with optic capture group (24 eyes). The trans-scleral ciliary sulcus fixation and ciliary sulcus insertion groups had significantly different deviations than the in-the-bag group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the ciliary sulcus insertion with optic capture and the in-the-bag insertion groups (p = 0.100). CONCLUSION: Refractive deviation was significantly different between the eyes that underwent trans-scleral ciliary sulcus fixation or ciliary sulcus insertion and the eyes that underwent in-the-bag insertion. However, there was no significant deviation among the eyes that underwent ciliary sulcus insertion with optic capture.