-
American Journal of Ophthalmology Jan 2014To summarize the epidemiology of pathologic myopia and myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and their impact on vision. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To summarize the epidemiology of pathologic myopia and myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and their impact on vision.
DESIGN
Systematic literature review of all English-language studies evaluating the epidemiology and visual burden of pathologic myopia or myopic CNV.
METHODS
PubMed and EMBASE were searched with no time limits using predefined search strings for English-language studies evaluating the epidemiology and visual burden of pathologic myopia and myopic CNV.
RESULTS
In total, 39 relevant publications were identified. Population-based studies reported pathologic myopia to be the first to third most frequent cause of blindness. The prevalence of pathologic myopia was reported to be 0.9%-3.1%, and the prevalence of visual impairment attributable to pathologic myopia ranged from 0.1%-0.5% (European studies) and from 0.2%-1.4% (Asian studies). The prevalence of CNV in individuals with pathologic myopia was reported to be 5.2%-11.3%, and was bilateral in approximately 15% of patients. All studies of visual outcome in patients with myopic CNV (duration ranging from less than 3 months to 21.5 years) reported deterioration in best-corrected visual acuity over time. Older age, subfoveal CNV location, and larger baseline lesion size were predictors of worse visual outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Pathologic myopia is an important cause of vision loss worldwide, affecting up to 3% of the population. Of these, a substantial proportion of patients develop myopic CNV, which mostly causes a significant progressive decrease in visual acuity. This condition should therefore be a target for new treatment strategies.
Topics: Choroidal Neovascularization; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Myopia, Degenerative; Prevalence; Vision Disorders; Visual Acuity; Visually Impaired Persons
PubMed: 24099276
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.08.010 -
Survey of Ophthalmology 2023Myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) is a vision-threatening complication of high myopia. Here, we systematically review cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Myopic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) is a vision-threatening complication of high myopia. Here, we systematically review cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, and summarize the associated factors of myopic CNV using meta-analysis where applicable. Among 1,333 records assessed, 50 were found eligible, all having a low-to-moderate risk of bias. Highly myopic eyes with CNV had a higher risk of lacquer cracks (odds ratio = 2.88) and patchy chorioretinal atrophy (odds ratio = 3.43) than those without. The mean posterior staphyloma height (µm) was greater in myopic CNV eyes than in highly myopic eyes without CNV (mean difference = 82.03). The thinning of choroidal thickness (µm) between myopic eyes with and without CNV differed significantly (mean difference = -47.76). The level of vascular endothelial growth factor (pg/ml) in the aqueous humor of myopic CNV eyes was significantly higher than in highly myopic eyes without CNV (mean difference = 24.98), the same as interleukin-8 (IL-8) (pg/ml, mean difference = 7.73). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the vascular endothelial growth factor, complement factor I, and collagen type VIII alpha 1 genes were associated with myopic CNV. We found that myopic CNV eyes have a higher ratio of lacquer cracks and patchy chorioretinal atrophy, thinner choroid, greater posterior staphyloma height, and a higher level of vascular endothelial growth factor and IL-8 in aqueous. Structural predisposing lesions, hemodynamic, genetic, and systemic factors are also associated with myopic CNV.
Topics: Humans; Interleukin-8; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Cross-Sectional Studies; Visual Acuity; Retrospective Studies; Myopia; Choroidal Neovascularization; Atrophy; Myopia, Degenerative; Fluorescein Angiography
PubMed: 37517683
DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2023.07.006 -
Journal of Ophthalmology 2022This review is proposed to summarize the updates on COVID-19 and ophthalmology along with the bibliometric features of articles that have been published since the... (Review)
Review
This review is proposed to summarize the updates on COVID-19 and ophthalmology along with the bibliometric features of articles that have been published since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak. The databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched using "Coronavirus," "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "pandemic," "ophthalmology," "ophthalmic," and "eye" keywords. All published articles except commentaries, errata, and corrigenda up to April 2021 were included. Titles and abstracts were screened, and ophthalmology-focused articles were collected. The bibliographic information of the articles, such as the name and country of the first author, type of study, date of publication, language, and journal name, were extracted. Included studies were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist. After systematic searching, 2,669 distinct articles were screened by title/abstract, and 1,174 ophthalmology-focused articles were selected to be reviewed. Ophthalmology-focused publications accounted for less than 0.5 percent of the total COVID-19-related articles. Most of the articles were published in the Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, and the main publication type was "original article." Almost 88% of the publications were in English. There was a decline in the publication rate during the initial months of 2021 compared with the middle and last months of 2020. Most of the publications were affiliated with the United States of America. However, Singapore and the United Kingdom were the countries with the highest number of publications after population adjustment. Furthermore, a comprehensive review on major topics including SARS-CoV-2 ocular tropism, ophthalmic manifestations, ocular complications due to COVID-19 treatment strategies, the pandemic effect on ophthalmology care and operations, myopia progression during the pandemic, and telemedicine was conducted.
PubMed: 35646394
DOI: 10.1155/2022/8195228 -
Cureus Mar 2024There is a knowledge gap in the relationship between sleep duration and myopia. Since sleep duration is a modifiable risk factor, its association with the development... (Review)
Review
There is a knowledge gap in the relationship between sleep duration and myopia. Since sleep duration is a modifiable risk factor, its association with the development and progression of myopia has implications for public health. This review was conducted in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The bibliographic databases of PubMed and Scopus were searched for published studies on the association between sleep duration and myopia. These databases were searched in December 2023 with no date or study design limits. The relevant literature was extracted and met the priori determined population (children, adolescents, and adults suffering from myopia with or without corrective glasses), intervention/exposure (sleep), and the outcome (various indicators of sleep especially sleep duration/bedtime/wake time and sleep quality). Data were gathered by gender, age, and refraction technique and standardized to the definition of myopia as refractive error ≥0.50 diopter. The relevant literature was extracted from these electronic databases using the keywords "sleep," "sleep duration," "bedtime," and "myopia." English language articles related to the topic were included. Articles that have discussed the role of risk factors for myopia but did not mention any relation to sleep were excluded. Sixteen studies were included after reviewing the relevant literature, and only six studies have shown a significant relationship between shorter duration of sleep and the development of myopia. This review suggests that apart from other environmental factors, sleep duration may have a role in developing myopia. Thus, increasing awareness about optimum sleep duration has a potential utility to reduce the development and progression of myopia.
PubMed: 38618360
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.56216 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Nov 2022To determine the diagnostic agreement of non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in children. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the diagnostic agreement of non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in children.
METHOD
The study methodology followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases were searched for comparative studies exploring refraction performed on children under non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic conditions. There was no restriction on the year of publication; however, only publications in the English language were eligible. Inclusion criteria consisted of children aged ≤12 years, any degree or type of refractive error, either sex and no ocular or binocular co-morbidities. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was conducted to synthesise data from all included studies. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were undertaken for those studies with a risk of bias.
RESULTS
Ten studies consisting of 2724 participants were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. The test for overall effect was not significant when comparing non-cycloplegic Plusoptix and cycloplegic autorefractors (Z = 0.34, p = 0.74). The pooled mean difference (MD) was -0.08 D (95% CI -0.54 D, +0.38 D) with a prediction interval of -1.72 D to +1.56 D. At less than 0.25 D, this indicates marginal overestimation of myopia and underestimation of hyperopia under non-cycloplegic conditions. When comparing non-cycloplegic autorefraction with a Retinomax and Canon autorefractor to cycloplegic refraction, a significant difference was found (Z = 9.79, p < 0.001) and (Z = 4.61, p < 0.001), respectively.
DISCUSSION
Non-cycloplegic Plusoptix is the most useful autorefractor for estimating refractive error in young children with low to moderate levels of hyperopia. Results also suggest that cycloplegic refraction must remain the test of choice when measuring refractive error ≤12 years of age. There were insufficient data to explore possible reasons for heterogeneity. Further research is needed to investigate the agreement between non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in relation to the type and level of refractive error at different ages.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Hyperopia; Mydriatics; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular; Refractive Errors; Vision Tests
PubMed: 35913773
DOI: 10.1111/opo.13022 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Nov 2022To provide contemporary and future estimates of childhood myopia prevalence in Africa. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To provide contemporary and future estimates of childhood myopia prevalence in Africa.
METHODS
A systematic online literature search was conducted for articles on childhood (≤18 years) myopia (spherical equivalent [SE] ≤ -0.50D; high myopia: SE ≤ -6.00D) in Africa. Population- or school-based cross-sectional studies published from 1 Jan 2000 to 30 May 2021 were included. Meta-analysis using Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation was performed to estimate the prevalence of childhood myopia and high myopia. Myopia prevalence from subgroup analyses for age groups and settings were used as baseline for generating a prediction model using linear regression.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies from 19 (of 54) African countries were included in the meta-analysis (N = 737,859). Overall prevalence of childhood myopia and high myopia were 4.7% (95% CI: 3.3%-6.5%) and 0.6% (95% CI: 0.2%-1.1%), respectively. Estimated prevalence across the African regions was highest in the North (6.8% [95% CI: 4.0%-10.2%]), followed by Southern (6.3% [95% CI: 3.9%-9.1%]), East (4.7% [95% CI: 3.1%-6.7%]) and West (3.5% [95% CI: 1.9%-6.3%]) Africa. Prevalence from 2011 to 2021 was approximately double that from 2000 to 2010 for all studies combined, and between 1.5 and 2.5 times higher for ages 5-11 and 12-18 years, for boys and girls and for urban and rural settings, separately. Childhood myopia prevalence is projected to increase in urban settings and older children to 11.1% and 10.8% by 2030, 14.4% and 14.1% by 2040 and 17.7% and 17.4% by 2050, respectively; marginally higher than projected in the overall population (16.4% by 2050).
CONCLUSIONS
Childhood myopia prevalence has approximately doubled since 2010, with a further threefold increase predicted by 2050. Given this trajectory and the specific public health challenges in Africa, it is imperative to implement basic myopia prevention programmes, enhance spectacle coverage and ophthalmic services and generate more data to understand the changing myopia epidemiology to mitigate the expanding risk of the African population.
Topics: Adolescent; Africa; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Myopia; Prevalence; Rural Population
PubMed: 35959749
DOI: 10.1111/opo.13035 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024To comprehensively assess rebound effects by comparing myopia progression during atropine treatment and after discontinuation. A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE,...
To comprehensively assess rebound effects by comparing myopia progression during atropine treatment and after discontinuation. A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted up to 20 September 2023, using the keywords "myopia," "rebound," and "discontinue." Language restrictions were not applied, and reference lists were scrutinized for relevant studies. Our study selection criteria focused on randomized control trials and interventional studies involving children with myopia, specifically those treated with atropine or combination therapies for a minimum of 6 months, followed by a cessation period of at least 1 month. The analysis centered on reporting annual rates of myopia progression, considering changes in spherical equivalent (SE) or axial length (AL). Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers, and heterogeneity was assessed using I statistics. A random-effects model was applied, and effect sizes were determined through weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals Our primary outcome was the evaluation of rebound effects on spherical equivalent or axial length. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on cessation and treatment durations, dosage levels, age, and baseline SE to provide a nuanced understanding of the data. The analysis included 13 studies involving 2060 children. Rebound effects on SE were significantly higher at 6 months (WMD, 0.926 D/y; 95%CI, 0.288-1.563 D/y; = .004) compared to 12 months (WMD, 0.268 D/y; 95%CI, 0.077-0.460 D/y; = .006) after discontinuation of atropine. AL showed similar trends, with higher rebound effects at 6 months (WMD, 0.328 mm/y; 95%CI, 0.165-0.492 mm/y; < .001) compared to 12 months (WMD, 0.121 mm/y; 95%CI, 0.02-0.217 mm/y; = .014). Sensitivity analyses confirmed consistent results. Shorter treatment durations, younger age, and higher baseline SE levels were associated with more pronounced rebound effects. Transitioning or stepwise cessation still caused rebound effects but combining optical therapy with atropine seemed to prevent the rebound effects. Our meta-analysis highlights the temporal and dose-dependent rebound effects after discontinuing atropine. Individuals with shorter treatment durations, younger age, and higher baseline SE tend to experience more significant rebound effects. Further research on the rebound effect is warranted. [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=463093], identifier [registration number].
PubMed: 38318144
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1343698 -
International Journal of Ophthalmology 2023To assess the efficacy versus the adverse effects of various concentrations of atropine in the prevention of myopia in Asian children.
Efficacy and safety of atropine at different concentrations in prevention of myopia progression in Asian children: a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
AIM
To assess the efficacy versus the adverse effects of various concentrations of atropine in the prevention of myopia in Asian children.
METHODS
Databases (PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of science) were comprehensively searched from inception to April 2022. Types of studies included were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The published languages were limited to English. Two researchers assessed the quality of included studies independently using Cochrane risk of bias tool based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used for detection of publication bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using STATA (version 15.0; StataCorp).
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs involving 2268 patients were included in the study. In the atropine group, spherical equivalent progressed at a significantly lower rate [weighted mean difference (WMD)=0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23, 0.54] than in the control group. A WMD of 0.15 mm was associated with less axial elongation (95%CI -0.19, -0.10). Different doses showed statistically significant differences (<0.05) and an improved effect could result from a higher concentration. Changes in photopic pupil size and mesopic pupil size in atropine group is 0.70 mm (95%CI: 0.33, 1.06) and 0.38 mm (95%CI: 0.22, 0.54) more than the control group. In the present Meta-analysis, no changes in accommodative amplitude (AA) were associated with atropine administration. Atropine administration increased the risk of adverse effects by 1.37 times.
CONCLUSION
Concentrations of less than 1% atropine are able to effectively retard diopter and axis growth of myopia in Asian children in a dose-dependent manner. Meanwhile, it caused pupil enlargement, but induced no change in the AA within this range. Further study is required to determine the dosage needed to achieve maximum efficacy and minimal side effects.
PubMed: 37602338
DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2023.08.20 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Jul 2024To synthesise evidence across studies on factors associated with pathologic myopia (PM) onset and progression based on the META-analysis for Pathologic Myopia (META-PM)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To synthesise evidence across studies on factors associated with pathologic myopia (PM) onset and progression based on the META-analysis for Pathologic Myopia (META-PM) classification framework.
METHODS
Findings from six longitudinal studies (5-18 years) were narratively synthesised and meta-analysed, using odds ratio (OR) as the common measure of association. All studies adjusted for baseline myopia, age and sex at a minimum. The quality of evidence was rated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.
RESULTS
Five out of six studies were conducted in Asia. There was inconclusive evidence of an independent effect (or lack thereof) of ethnicity and sex on PM onset/progression. The odds of PM onset increased with greater axial length (pooled OR: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.71-2.40; p < 0.001), older age (pooled OR: 1.07; 1.05-1.09; p < 0.001) and more negative spherical equivalent refraction, SER (OR: 0.77; 0.68-0.87; p < 0.001), all of which were supported by an acceptable level of evidence. Fundus tessellation was found to independently increase the odds of PM onset in a population-based study (OR: 3.02; 2.58-3.53; p < 0.001), although this was only supported by weak evidence. There was acceptable evidence that greater axial length (pooled OR: 1.23; 1.09-1.39; p < 0.001), more negative SER (pooled OR: 0.87; 0.83-0.92; p < 0.001) and higher education level (pooled OR: 3.17; 1.36-7.35; p < 0.01) increased the odds of PM progression. Other baseline factors found to be associated with PM progression but currently supported by weak evidence included age (pooled OR: 1.01), severity of myopic maculopathy (OR: 3.61), intraocular pressure (OR: 1.62) and hypertension (OR: 0.21).
CONCLUSIONS
Most PM risk/prognostic factors are not supported by an adequate evidence base at present (an indication that PM remains understudied). Current factors for which an acceptable level of evidence exists (limited in number) are unmodifiable in adults and lack personalised information. More longitudinal studies focusing on uncovering modifiable factors and imaging biomarkers are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Myopia, Degenerative; Disease Progression; Risk Factors; Refraction, Ocular
PubMed: 38563652
DOI: 10.1111/opo.13312 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Nov 2017On a global scale, myopia is one of the most common causes of visual impairment. Given the increasing prevalence of myopia, it is vital to understand the pathogenesis... (Review)
Review
On a global scale, myopia is one of the most common causes of visual impairment. Given the increasing prevalence of myopia, it is vital to understand the pathogenesis and to identify potential interventions. Some studies have described physical activity as a potential correlation for myopia. The objective of this study was to make a systematic review regarding the correlation between physical activity and myopia. A total of 263 papers were identified in a systematic database search of PubMed/Medline and Embase. Five steps of screening removed studies of a low evidence quality and animal studies. Studies included had refractive error and physical activity (as measured by questionnaires, accelerometers and cycle ergometers) as separate, well-defined outcomes. Nine studies (six cross-sectional, two cohorts and one case-control study) with a total of 17 634 subjects were included. Six studies demonstrated a reverse association between physical activity and myopia. Three studies supported this, but also attributed the results to time spent outdoors and not physical activity per se. One cross-sectional study found no relation. We could not identify trends among the papers regarding the type of studies, population sizes, ethnicity or age of study subjects. A consistent relationship between more physical activity and less myopia was observed. No evidence of physical activity as an independent risk factor for myopia was seen. Evidence suggests that time outdoors remain the most important factor. Future studies should include objective measurements of physical activity to determine a potential independent effect. Distinction between physical activity and outdoor exposure remains important.
Topics: Disease Progression; Exercise; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Motor Activity; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular
PubMed: 27966836
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13316