Retrospective Analysis of Axial Length Changes in Overnight Orthokeratology in an Academic Myopia Control Clinic

imageSIGNIFICANCE

Although the myopia control efficacy of orthokeratology lenses has been established with clinical trials, reports of axial length change in non–study-based patient care are scarce. This study investigates the use of orthokeratology lenses for myopia control in a clinical population and compares axial elongation against those published in recent clinical investigations.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate factors affecting axial elongation during use of orthokeratology lenses for myopia control in an academic clinical setting.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective consecutive case series from the Myopia Control Clinic at the Herbert Wertheim School of Optometry at the University of California, Berkeley (Berkeley, CA). Patients ranging from 5 to 18 years old using orthokeratology for at least 1 year were included in the study. Data from 102 patients’ eyes were analyzed at baseline (before the initiation of treatment) and after 1 year of wear (12 ± 3 months). Multivariate analysis was undertaken to identify factors significantly associated with axial elongation over this period.

RESULTS

Mean (±standard deviation) spherical equivalent refraction and axial length at baseline were −2.54 (±1.21) D and 24.53 (±0.82) mm, respectively. By the 1-year follow-up, eyes had shown significant axial elongation (0.18 ± 0.24 mm; P

Intereye Differences in the Clinical Assessment of Intraocular Pressure and Ocular Biomechanics

imageSIGNIFICANCE

Clinicians and researchers will have evidence whether intereye differences confound clinical measurements of intraocular pressure or of ocular biomechanical parameters.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether intraocular pressure and biomechanical parameters, as measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) and by Cornea Visualization with Scheimpflug Technology (CorVis ST), are different between the first and second eye measured.

METHODS

Intraocular pressure and biomechanical parameters were collected from both eyes of healthy participants (N = 139). The ORA measured corneal-compensated intraocular pressure, Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure, and corneal hysteresis. The CorVis ST measured biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure, stiffness parameter at first applanation, and stiffness parameter at highest concavity. For each measurement, a paired t test compared the value of the first eye measured against that of the second eye measured.

RESULTS

For the ORA, Goldmann-correlated intraocular pressure was significantly higher (P = .001) in the first eye (14.8 [3.45] mmHg) than in the second eye (14.3 [3.63] mmHg). For the CorVis ST, biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure was significantly higher (P