American journal of translational research · 2025
Clinical advantages of multifocal soft contact lenses in myopia control for adolescents.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cao Yongmei, Liu Jiabao
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of multifocal soft contact lenses (MFSCLs) and orthokeratology (OK) lenses in managing myopia in adolescents.
METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 106 myopic adolescents, divided into two groups: OK (n=50) and MFSCLs (n=56). Refractive error (RE), intraocular pressure (IOP), axial length (AL), and choroidal thickness were measured at baseline (T0), 6-month follow-up (T1), and 12-month follow-up (T2). Additionally, accommodative amplitude, accommodative sensitivity, negative/positive relative accommodation (NRA/PRA), interleukin-6 (IL-6), epidermal growth factor (EGF), psychological status, and quality of life were compared between T0 and T2. Safety during treatment was also assessed.
RESULTS: Both interventions resulted in a significant increase in RE at T1 and T2 (P<0.05), with no significant differences between groups (P>0.05). IOP, AL, and choroidal thickness remained stable (all P>0.05). At T2, the MFSCLs group showed significant improvements in accommodative amplitude, accommodative sensitivity, and NRA (all P<0.05), along with a reduction in PRA (P<0.05), although no significant inter-group differences were observed (P>0.05). Furthermore, the MFSCLs group exhibited significantly lower IL-6 levels, higher EGF, and fewer adverse reactions (all P<0.05). Psychological status and quality of life improvements were significantly greater in the MFSCLs group (P<0.05).
CONCLUSION: MFSCLs and OK lenses demonstrate comparable myopia control effects. However, MFSCLs offer additional benefits in reducing inflammation, enhancing safety, and improving mental health and quality of life.
METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 106 myopic adolescents, divided into two groups: OK (n=50) and MFSCLs (n=56). Refractive error (RE), intraocular pressure (IOP), axial length (AL), and choroidal thickness were measured at baseline (T0), 6-month follow-up (T1), and 12-month follow-up (T2). Additionally, accommodative amplitude, accommodative sensitivity, negative/positive relative accommodation (NRA/PRA), interleukin-6 (IL-6), epidermal growth factor (EGF), psychological status, and quality of life were compared between T0 and T2. Safety during treatment was also assessed.
RESULTS: Both interventions resulted in a significant increase in RE at T1 and T2 (P<0.05), with no significant differences between groups (P>0.05). IOP, AL, and choroidal thickness remained stable (all P>0.05). At T2, the MFSCLs group showed significant improvements in accommodative amplitude, accommodative sensitivity, and NRA (all P<0.05), along with a reduction in PRA (P<0.05), although no significant inter-group differences were observed (P>0.05). Furthermore, the MFSCLs group exhibited significantly lower IL-6 levels, higher EGF, and fewer adverse reactions (all P<0.05). Psychological status and quality of life improvements were significantly greater in the MFSCLs group (P<0.05).
CONCLUSION: MFSCLs and OK lenses demonstrate comparable myopia control effects. However, MFSCLs offer additional benefits in reducing inflammation, enhancing safety, and improving mental health and quality of life.