BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis reviews the evidence for the risks and benefits associated with orthokeratology (OK) treatment compared with other methods of myopia control in children and adults.
METHODS: A systematic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Pubmed, Embase and Ovid was conducted from database inception to 22nd August 2021. Studies that reported on risks, visual and ocular biometric effects of OK in patients > 5 years of age with myopia (- 0.75 to - 6.00D) were included. Main outcomes are change in axial length and any adverse event.
RESULTS: Fourty-five papers were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The quality of data was variable and of moderate certainty, and selection bias likely skewed the results towards a relative benefit for OK. The rate of axial elongation in children was lower for OK treatment compared to other treatment modalities at one year (MD - 0.16 mm, 95% CI - 0.25 to - 0.07). Rate of change in axial length in children rebounded after OK discontinuation compared to participants who continued treatment (MD 0.10 mm, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.14). Adults and children wearing OK were up to 3.79 times more likely to experience an adverse event when compared with conventional contact lenses (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.24 to ll.), though this evidence base is underdeveloped and requires additional well-designed studies for substantial conclusions to be drawn.
CONCLUSIONS: OK arrests myopia progression while in use, however, there remain unanswered questions about the optimal duration of treatment, discontinuation effects and long-term risk for adverse events.

OBJECTIVE: Myopia is controlled optically with peripheral defocus spectacles, multifocal contact lenses, or orthokeratology lenses. However, it is unknown which optical correction will improve visual performance. This scoping review aimed to identify and summarize studies on various visual functions using optical corrections for myopia control.
METHODS: To develop the search strategy, population (Myopia), concept (visual performance), and context (unrestricted race/region) were used. PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched using the keywords myopia, contrast sensitivity, high and low contrast visual acuity, stereopsis, and optical correction of myopia control. This scoping review protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework registry and followed the framework for scoping review outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
RESULTS: Eight studies (n = 8) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Four were conducted in Europe, two were conducted in China, and one was conducted in Japan and Singapore. Five studies were randomized controlled trials, out of which three used contact lenses and two studies used peripheral defocus spectacles lenses. Studies ranged from one day to 2 years. Three studies that used orthokeratology lenses were prospective study designs. Among the studies that used orthokeratology lenses and contact lenses, two studies measured the contrast sensitivity function with CSV1000 (Vector Vision) under mesopic and photopic conditions, with and without glare. Two studies measured the central and peripheral contrast sensitivity using psychophysics experiments. High and low contrast visual acuity was measured using the Freiburg Vision Test (n = 1) and ETDRS charts (n = 3), and stereopsis was assessed using a random dot stereogram (n = 1). The studies showed a reduction in central and peripheral contrast sensitivity function and low contrast acuity when treated with multifocal contact lenses, orthokeratology lenses, and peripheral defocus lenses compared with single-vision lenses.
CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review found a reduction in central and peripheral contrast sensitivity function, as well as low contrast visual acuity when using various optical corrections for myopia control, while high-contrast visual acuity remained the same. The impact of visual functions may not influence the effectiveness of myopia control. Eye care practitioners should provide awareness to the parent and patient population about the potential visual impact of recent designs for optical corrections of myopia control.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to synthesize the variations in subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) observed at different follow-up intervals in myopic children undergoing orthokeratology treatment.
UNASSIGNED: Relevant articles were systematically retrieved from databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The retrieval period extended from the inception of these databases to November 2023. Means and standard deviations (SD) of baseline and post-treatment SFCT were selected as the results for analysis and calculation.
UNASSIGNED: A total of eight articles involving 478 eyes fulfilled the inclusion criteria. At 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months intervals, the SFCT demonstrated significant increases by 16.74 μm (95% CI: 8.66, 24.82; p < 0.0001), 13.41 μm (95% CI: 4.36, 22.45; p = 0.004), and 17.57 μm (95% CI: 8.41, 26.73; p = 0.0002), respectively. Besides, children treated with orthokeratology exhibited a notably thicker change of SFCT in comparison with children with single-vision spectacles (SVL) (WMD = 13.50, 95% CI: 11.69, 15.13; p < 0.0001).
UNASSIGNED: Myopic children undergoing orthokeratology treatment experience a discernible increase in SFCT at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Furthermore, compared to children utilizing SVL, those undergoing orthokeratology manifest a more pronounced thickening of SFCT.

OBJECTIVE: To review the rebound effect after cessation of different myopia control treatments.
METHODS: A systematic review that included full-length randomised controlled studies (RCTs), as well as post-hoc analyses of RCTs reporting new findings on myopia control treatments rebound effect in two databases, PubMed and Web of Science, was performed according to the PRISMA statement. The search period was between 15 June 2023 and 30 June 2023. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to analyse the quality of the selected studies.
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included in this systematic review. Unifying the rebound effects of all myopia control treatments, the mean rebound effect for axial length (AL) and spherical equivalent refraction (SER) were 0.10 ± 0.07 mm [-0.02 to 0.22] and -0.27 ± 0.2 D [-0.71 to -0.03] after 10.2 ± 7.4 months of washout, respectively. In addition, spectacles with highly aspherical lenslets or defocus incorporated multiple segments technology, soft multifocal contact lenses and orthokeratology showed lower rebound effects compared with atropine and low-level light therapy, with a mean rebound effect for AL and SER of 0.04 ± 0.04 mm [0 to 0.08] and -0.13 ± 0.07 D [-0.05 to -0.2], respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: It appears that the different treatments for myopia control produce a rebound effect after their cessation. Specifically, optical treatments seem to produce less rebound effect than pharmacological or light therapies. However, more studies are required to confirm these results.

The purpose of this investigation is to determine the efficacy of orthokeratology (OK) compared to orthokeratology combined with atropine (AOK) for the control of myopia in children. A systematic review that included systematic reviews with meta-analyses, as well as randomized and controlled clinical trials, was carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, Taylor & Francis, Science Direct databases, as well as a manual search. Of the Q1-Q4 journals of the Scimago Journal & Country Rank, published in the last 5 years in English and Spanish. Eighteen studies that met the eligibility criteria were considered. The articles selected included 6,866 patients for analysis, where orthokeratology combined with 0.01% atropine was found to be more effective due to its ability to reduce the progression of myopia and axial elongation. In our investigation, it was determined that there could be an additive effect in the combination of 0.01% atropine with orthokeratology in a period of 1-2 years of treatment in patients with mild myopia; however, more multiethnic studies should be carried out, in where a correct evaluation of the progression of myopia, genetic and environmental factors that may influence the results is considered.

To compare the treatment efficacy of childhood myopia control optical interventions [spectacles, soft contact lenses (SCLs) and orthokeratology (OK) lenses], explore the consistency of treatment efficacies during the treatment period and evaluate the impact of baseline spherical equivalent refraction (SER), axial length (AL) and age on the treatment effect. A literature search of EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar databases identified 220 articles published between January 2000 and April 2022, which reported the treatment efficacy by differences in the SER and AL change between intervention and control groups. Thirty-five articles were included in the analysis. Treatment effect sizes (ESs) were calculated, where more positive and negative directions indicated greater treatment efficacy for SER and AL respectively. For SER, the ESs with peripheral add design spectacles (0.66) and SCLs (0.53) were large but not significantly different between treatment types (p = 0.69). For AL, ESs with peripheral add design spectacles (-0.37), SCLs (-0.55) and OK lenses (-0.93) were large, but OK lenses had a significantly greater effect than peripheral add design spectacles (p ≤ 0.001). ESs were large during the first 12 months of treatment for all interventions [peripheral add design SCLs and OK (F ≥ 5.39, p ≤ 0.01), peripheral add design spectacles (F = 0.47, p = 0.63)] but reduced towards the end of 24-36 months of treatment. Baseline SER had an impact on the treatment effect with peripheral add design spectacles only. Optical interventions are efficacious in controlling childhood myopia progression. However, treatment effects were largest only during the first 12 months of treatment and reduced over time.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of orthokeratology for slowing myopia progression in children.
METHODS: We performed a specific search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials, CNKI, SinoMed, and Wanfang Data for RCTs conducted up to October 1, 2022. We pooled the weighted mean difference (WMD) between the orthokeratology and control groups for axial length (AL) elongation and the odds ratio (OR) for rates of adverse events and dropout.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 655 eyes were included. There were significant differences in the effects of orthokeratology versus control in slowing AL elongation with WMD of -0.11 mm (95% confidence interval (CI), -0.13 to -0.08; P <0.01) at 6 months, -0.16 mm (95% CI, -0.18 to -0.13; P <0.01) at 12 months, -0.23 mm (95% CI, -0.29 to -0.18; P <0.01) at 18 months, and -0.28 mm (95% CI, -0.38 to -0.19; P <0.01) at 24 months, respectively. Myopia control rate declined, with 64%, 53%, 50%, and 47% recorded for 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. There was no statistical significance for adverse events between orthokeratology and control groups (OR=2.63, 95% CI, 0.72-9.61; P =0.11).
CONCLUSIONS: Orthokeratology can effectively slow myopia progression in children, and the efficacy of myopia control decreases with time.

To evaluate the relative efficacy of peripheral defocus contact lenses (PDCLs) and orthokeratology (OK) in a real-world clinical population, and compare these results with previous randomised controlled clinical trials.
Records from a university practice were reviewed to identify children who were treated with OK or PDCLs. The analysed sample contained 273 visits from 77 patients. Annualised rates of axial length (AL) progression were calculated and used as the response variable in both linear mixed-effects (LME) and nonlinear regression models.
On average, children were 10.7 years of age at baseline (p = 0.14 between treatments), and most patients were female. More Asian children wore OK lenses compared with PDCLs (p < 0.01). At baseline, children had ~3.00 D of myopia and 0.75 D of astigmatism in both treatment groups (p > 0.20 between treatments). LME regression models using only baseline covariates showed no evidence that the annualised change in AL differed between treatments, with or without the inclusion of age, race, sex, baseline AL or spherical equivalent refractive error. Across all possible subsets of models, age at baseline was the best predictor of annualised AL change. There was no statistical difference between parameters of an exponential decay model fitted within treatment using follow-up age as a time-varying predictor, indicating that the rate of annualised change in AL was similar for OK and PDCL.
Retrospective analysis of real-world clinical data found no difference in annualised AL growth between PDCL and OK. Importantly, the AL progression from this clinical setting is consistent with that reported in randomised clinical trials. Therefore, continued research of real-world performance is warranted to understand the safety and efficacy of modern myopia control treatments in the broader population.

Myopia is a common eye condition that increases the risk of sight-threatening complications. Each additional diopter increases the chance of complications. The purpose of this review was to make an overview of myopia control treatment options for children with myopia progression.In this nonsystematic review, we searched PubMed and Cochrane databases for English-language studies published from 2019 to September 2021. Emphasis was given to selection of randomized controlled trials. Nineteen randomized controlled trials and two retrospective studies were included. Topical atropine and orthokeratology remain the most used treatments, whereas lenses with novel designs are emerging treatments. Overall myopia progression in the treatment groups for low-dose atropine and orthokeratology was lower than in the control groups, and their efficacy was reported in several randomized controlled trials and confirmed by various systematic reviews and meta-analysis. The findings of myopia progression and axial elongation for the MiSight, defocus incorporated multiple segment spectacle lens, highly aspherical lenslets, and diffusion optics technology spectacle lens were comparable. Public health interventions to optimize environmental influences may also be important strategies to control myopia. Optimal choice of management of myopia depends on treatment availability, acceptability to child and parents, and specific patient features such as age, baseline myopia, and lifestyle. Eye care providers need to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each therapy to best counsel parents of children with myopia.

BACKGROUND: Orthokeratology (OK) has a significant effect on the control of myopia progression, and has been accepted by doctors and patients. A small number of studies have shown that the combination of OK and atropine can enhance myopia control. However, owing to individual differences, research groups, drug concentrations, and research design differences, the safety and effectiveness of the combined treatment still need to be verified. Therefore, the present meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of 0.01% atropine on ocular axial elongation in myopic children.
METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CBM databases from inception to March 1, 2022. Meta-analysis will be conducted using STATA version 14.0 and Review Manager version 5.3 softwares. We calculated the weighted mean differences (WMD) to analyze the change in ocular axial length (AL) between orthokeratology combined with 0.01% atropine (OKA) and OK alone. Cochran\'s Q-statistic and I2 test were used to evaluate the potential heterogeneity between studies. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of single studies on the overall estimate. We will also perform subgroup and meta-regression analyses to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity. We will conduct Begger\'s funnel plots and Egger\'s linear regression tests to investigate the publication bias.
RESULTS: This systematic review aimed to determine the effect of 0.01% atropine on ocular axial elongation in children with myopia.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide helpful evidence for the effect of 0.01% atropine on ocular axial elongation in myopic children.