-
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology... 2020Presbyopia reduces an individual's ability to perform visual tasks at near distances. It is a global problem, affecting over a billion people worldwide. Contact lenses,... (Review)
Review
Presbyopia reduces an individual's ability to perform visual tasks at near distances. It is a global problem, affecting over a billion people worldwide. Contact lenses, glasses, refractive surgery, and intraocular lens surgery are the main modalities in presbyopia treatment, although they all have some disadvantages. Thus, there is an increasing need for effective, easy-to-use, and noninvasive approaches for treating presbyopia while not limiting patients' daily activities. Pharmacological presbyopia treatment as an alternative method has been under investigation in recent years. We reviewed all relevant articles using the keywords "presbyopia," "presbyopia treatment," "pharmacological presbyopia treatment," and "presbyopic corrections" from 2010 to February 9, 2020, and summarized the main results of clinical trials, investigating the drops used for presbyopia treatment.
Topics: Accommodation, Ocular; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Muscarinic Agonists; Ophthalmic Solutions; Presbyopia; Refraction, Ocular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32511122
DOI: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000297 -
Journal of Ophthalmology 2020Bifocal and multifocal optical devices are intended to get images into focus from objects placed at different distances from the observer. Spectacles, contact lenses,... (Review)
Review
Bifocal and multifocal optical devices are intended to get images into focus from objects placed at different distances from the observer. Spectacles, contact lenses, and intraocular lenses can meet the requirements to provide such a solution. Contact lenses provide unique characteristics as a platform for implementing bifocality and multifocality. Compared to spectacles, they are closer to the eye, providing a wider field of view, less distortion, and their use is more consistent as they are not so easily removed along the day. In addition, contact lenses are also minimally invasive, can be easily exchangeable, and, therefore, suitable for conditions in which surgical procedures are not indicated. Contact lenses can remain centered with the eye despite eye movements, providing the possibility for simultaneous imaging from different object distances. The main current indications for bifocal and multifocal contact lenses include presbyopia correction in adult population and myopia control in children. Considering the large numbers of potential candidates for optical correction of presbyopia and the demographic trends in myopia, the potential impact of contact lenses for presbyopia and myopia applications is undoubtedly tremendous. However, the ocular characteristics and expectations vary significantly between young and older candidates and impose different challenges in fitting bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for the correction of presbyopia and myopia control. This review presents the recent developments in material platforms, optical designs, simulated visual performance, and the clinical performance assessment of bifocal and multifocal contact lenses for presbyopia correction and/or myopia progression control.
PubMed: 32318285
DOI: 10.1155/2020/8067657 -
Deutsches Arzteblatt International Oct 2016All over the world, refractive errors are among the most frequently occuring treatable distur - bances of visual function. Ametropias have a prevalence of nearly 70%... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
All over the world, refractive errors are among the most frequently occuring treatable distur - bances of visual function. Ametropias have a prevalence of nearly 70% among adults in Germany and are thus of great epidemiologic and socio-economic relevance.
METHODS
In the light of their own clinical experience, the authors review pertinent articles retrieved by a selective literature search employing the terms "ametropia, "anisometropia," "refraction," "visual acuity," and epidemiology."
RESULTS
In 2011, only 31% of persons over age 16 in Germany did not use any kind of visual aid; 63.4% wore eyeglasses and 5.3% wore contact lenses. Refractive errors were the most common reason for consulting an ophthalmologist, accounting for 21.1% of all outpatient visits. A pinhole aperture (stenopeic slit) is a suitable instrument for the basic diagnostic evaluation of impaired visual function due to optical factors. Spherical refractive errors (myopia and hyperopia), cylindrical refractive errors (astigmatism), unequal refractive errors in the two eyes (anisometropia), and the typical optical disturbance of old age (presbyopia) cause specific functional limitations and can be detected by a physician who does not need to be an ophthalmologist.
CONCLUSION
Simple functional tests can be used in everyday clinical practice to determine quickly, easily, and safely whether the patient is suffering from a benign and easily correctable type of visual impairment, or whether there are other, more serious underlying causes.
Topics: Astigmatism; Eyeglasses; Germany; Humans; Prevalence; Refractive Errors; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 27839543
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0693 -
Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 2021Presbyopia is a common age-related vision disorder characterized by a progressive inability to focus on near objects. If uncorrected or under-corrected, presbyopia can... (Review)
Review
Presbyopia is a common age-related vision disorder characterized by a progressive inability to focus on near objects. If uncorrected or under-corrected, presbyopia can significantly impact patients' quality of life. Presbyopia represents an area of considerable unmet need due to its rising prevalence worldwide as the population ages, the high proportion of under-treated individuals in some parts of the world, and the limitations of currently available corrective methods. Progressive or bifocal spectacles are associated with peripheral blur, a restricted visual field and impaired depth perception, which have been linked to an increased risk of falls in the elderly. Contact lens options can be difficult to maintain due to the development of age-related dry eye symptoms and reduced manual dexterity. Other corrective methods involve surgical interventions that modify the optics of the cornea, replace the crystalline lens, or attempt to restore active accommodation. While patients undergoing surgery report satisfactory outcomes post-operatively, many of them eventually require reading glasses. Non-invasive therapies with novel mechanisms of action are currently being investigated; these include miotic agents and UNR844, a lipoic acid choline ester. In this narrative review, available evidence on presbyopia prevalence, quality of life impact and risk factors are described, with a focus on observational studies in non-clinical settings. The diagnosis pathway and patient journey in presbyopia are outlined, and various treatment options are analyzed. The data reviewed herein reveals significant gaps in the provision of vision correction for this common condition, with a paucity of effective, non-invasive treatment options broadly accessible to presbyopic individuals.
PubMed: 34079215
DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S259011 -
Ophthalmology Oct 2018Presbyopia prevalence and spectacle-correction coverage were estimated by systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic evidence, then modeled to expand to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
TOPIC
Presbyopia prevalence and spectacle-correction coverage were estimated by systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic evidence, then modeled to expand to country, region, and global estimates.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Understanding presbyopia epidemiologic factors and correction coverage is critical to overcoming the burden of vision impairment (VI) from uncorrected presbyopia.
METHODS
We performed systematic reviews of presbyopia prevalence and spectacle-correction coverage. Accepted presbyopia prevalence data were gathered into 5-year age groups from 0 to 90 years or older and meta-analyzed within World Health Organization global burden of disease regions. We developed a model based on amplitude of accommodation adjusted for myopia rates to match the regionally meta-analyzed presbyopia prevalence. Presbyopia spectacle-correction coverage was analyzed against country-level variables from the year of data collection; variation in correction coverage was described best by a model based on the Human Development Index, Gini coefficient, and health expenditure, with adjustments for age and urbanization. We used the models to estimate presbyopia prevalence and spectacle-correction coverage in each age group in urban and rural areas of every country in the world, and combined with population data to estimate the number of people with near VI.
RESULTS
We estimate there were 1.8 billion people (prevalence, 25%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-2.0 billion [23%-27%]) globally with presbyopia in 2015, 826 million (95% CI, 686-960 million) of whom had near VI because they had no, or inadequate, vision correction. Global unmet need for presbyopia correction in 2015 is estimated to be 45% (95% CI, 41%-49%). People with presbyopia are more likely to have adequate optical correction if they live in an urban area of a more developed country with higher health expenditure and lower inequality.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a significant burden of VI from uncorrected presbyopia, with the greatest burden in rural areas of low-resource countries.
Topics: Eyeglasses; Global Health; Humans; Presbyopia; Prevalence; Vision Disorders; Visual Acuity; Visually Impaired Persons
PubMed: 29753495
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.04.013 -
JAMA Ophthalmology Apr 2022AGN-190584 (Allergan, an AbbVie company) is an optimized topical formulation of pilocarpine hydrochloride, 1.25%, designed for managing presbyopia and enhanced with a... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
AGN-190584 (Allergan, an AbbVie company) is an optimized topical formulation of pilocarpine hydrochloride, 1.25%, designed for managing presbyopia and enhanced with a proprietary vehicle.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pilocarpine hydrochloride, 1.25%, in individuals with presbyopia.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This vehicle-controlled, participant- and investigator-masked, randomized, phase 3 clinical study, GEMINI 1, enrolled individuals with presbyopia, aged 40 to 55 years, at 36 sites in the United States from December 21, 2018, to October 31, 2019. Analysis took place between February 2020 and December 2021.
INTERVENTIONS
AGN-190584 or the AGN-190584 formulation vehicle was administered bilaterally, once daily for 30 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The proportion of participants with improvement of 3 or more lines in mesopic, high-contrast, binocular distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at hours 3 and 6 on day 30 were the primary and key secondary efficacy end points, respectively. Safety measures included adverse events.
RESULTS
Of 323 participants who were randomized, 235 (72.8%) were female and 292 (90.4%) were White. The mean (SD) age was 49.6 (3.5) years, and the baseline mean (SD) mesopic DCNVA was 29.2 (6.3) letters. A total of 163 individuals were randomized to AGN-190584 and 160 were randomized to vehicle. GEMINI 1 met its primary and key secondary efficacy end points. On day 30, hour 3, the percentage of participants with improvement of 3 or more lines in mesopic DCNVA was 30.7% (50 of 163) in the AGN-190584 group and 8.1% (13 of 160) in the vehicle group (difference, 22.5% [95% CI, 14.3%-30.8%]; adjusted P < .001). At hour 6, those percentages were 18.4% (30 of 163) and 8.8% (14 of 160), respectively (difference, 9.7% [95% CI, 2.3%-17.0%]; adjusted P = .01). At hour 8, the between-group difference in 3 or more lines of mesopic DCNVA gains was not statistically significant, but clinically relevant prespecified outcome measures demonstrated AGN-190584 superiority to vehicle in least-squares mean (SE) mesopic DCNVA change from baseline at hour 8 (5.4 [0.51] vs 3.6 [0.52] letters; P = .009) and photopic distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity at hour 8 (3.9 [0.44] vs 2.4 [0.45] letters; P = .01) and hour 10 (3.5 [0.46] vs 1.7 [0.47] letters; P = .004). No participants with mesopic DCNVA improvement of 3 or more lines at hour 3 had losses of more than 5 letters in mesopic, high-contrast, binocular-corrected distance visual acuity. The onset of effect was at 15 minutes. AGN-190584 demonstrated an acceptable safety and tolerability profile.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
AGN-190584 demonstrated superiority over vehicle in mesopic DCNVA on day 30, hours 3 and 6, with an acceptable safety profile. AGN-190584 is a safe and efficacious topical therapy for presbyopia through 30 days.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03804268.
Topics: Color Vision; Female; Humans; Male; Pilocarpine; Presbyopia; Treatment Outcome; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 35238902
DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2022.0059 -
The Lancet. Global Health Feb 2021To contribute to the WHO initiative, VISION 2020: The Right to Sight, an assessment of global vision impairment in 2020 and temporal change is needed. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To contribute to the WHO initiative, VISION 2020: The Right to Sight, an assessment of global vision impairment in 2020 and temporal change is needed. We aimed to extensively update estimates of global vision loss burden, presenting estimates for 2020, temporal change over three decades between 1990-2020, and forecasts for 2050.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based surveys of eye disease from January, 1980, to October, 2018. Only studies with samples representative of the population and with clearly defined visual acuity testing protocols were included. We fitted hierarchical models to estimate 2020 prevalence (with 95% uncertainty intervals [UIs]) of mild vision impairment (presenting visual acuity ≥6/18 and <6/12), moderate and severe vision impairment (<6/18 to 3/60), and blindness (<3/60 or less than 10° visual field around central fixation); and vision impairment from uncorrected presbyopia (presenting near vision
FINDINGS
In 2020, an estimated 43·3 million (95% UI 37·6-48·4) people were blind, of whom 23·9 million (55%; 20·8-26·8) were estimated to be female. We estimated 295 million (267-325) people to have moderate and severe vision impairment, of whom 163 million (55%; 147-179) were female; 258 million (233-285) to have mild vision impairment, of whom 142 million (55%; 128-157) were female; and 510 million (371-667) to have visual impairment from uncorrected presbyopia, of whom 280 million (55%; 205-365) were female. Globally, between 1990 and 2020, among adults aged 50 years or older, age-standardised prevalence of blindness decreased by 28·5% (-29·4 to -27·7) and prevalence of mild vision impairment decreased slightly (-0·3%, -0·8 to -0·2), whereas prevalence of moderate and severe vision impairment increased slightly (2·5%, 1·9 to 3·2; insufficient data were available to calculate this statistic for vision impairment from uncorrected presbyopia). In this period, the number of people who were blind increased by 50·6% (47·8 to 53·4) and the number with moderate and severe vision impairment increased by 91·7% (87·6 to 95·8). By 2050, we predict 61·0 million (52·9 to 69·3) people will be blind, 474 million (428 to 518) will have moderate and severe vision impairment, 360 million (322 to 400) will have mild vision impairment, and 866 million (629 to 1150) will have uncorrected presbyopia.
INTERPRETATION
Age-adjusted prevalence of blindness has reduced over the past three decades, yet due to population growth, progress is not keeping pace with needs. We face enormous challenges in avoiding vision impairment as the global population grows and ages.
FUNDING
Brien Holden Vision Institute, Fondation Thea, Fred Hollows Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lions Clubs International Foundation, Sightsavers International, and University of Heidelberg.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Blindness; Cataract; Eye Diseases; Female; Forecasting; Glaucoma; Global Burden of Disease; Global Health; Humans; Macular Degeneration; Male; Middle Aged; Presbyopia; Vision, Low; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33275950
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30425-3 -
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao. Yi Xue Ban =... Oct 2022Presbyopia, a progressive visual difficulty caused by weakened physiological regulation, is one of the main causes of visual impairment in people over 40 years old....
Presbyopia, a progressive visual difficulty caused by weakened physiological regulation, is one of the main causes of visual impairment in people over 40 years old. Currently, the main methods of correction of presbyopia include optical correction, surgical correction, and drug treatment, which can improve the visual nearness disorder to some extent. Optical correction is the most common way with advantages of safety, which can adjust the lens parameters at any time, while cause kinds of inconvenience in life by wearing and taking off glasses frequently. Surgical intervention, including corneal surgery, lens surgery and scleral surgery, with certain advantages and disadvantages in each operation style. New pharmaceutical agents are expected to be a new and effective method for the treatment of presbyopia, but it lacks multicenter randomized controlled trials and evidence-based medicine evidence to evaluate the safety and effectiveness.
PubMed: 36411697
DOI: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2022.220201 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Mar 2022Pharmacological treatment of presbyopia may be an alternative for those who want a spectacle-free scenario and an easy-to-use method with lower risk of irreversible... (Review)
Review
Pharmacological treatment of presbyopia may be an alternative for those who want a spectacle-free scenario and an easy-to-use method with lower risk of irreversible ocular adverse events. There are two main agents, miotics and lens softeners, investigated as agents for the pharmacological treatment. Miotic agents treat presbyopia by creating a pinhole effect which may increase the depth of focus at all working distances. The miotic agents have been studied for application to only one eye for monovision or both eyes. Their effect is temporary with common adverse events, such as headache and dim vision at nighttime, with no known long-term safety and efficacy. There have been studies on the miotic agents in combination with other agents for additive treatment effects or lessening adverse events, however, these combination effects are not clear. Lens softeners increase the elasticity of the lens, which is targeted at one of the etiologic mechanisms of presbyopia. There is only one lens softener being investigated in only a few trials. The results were inconclusive. The recent approval of 1.25% pilocarpine for treatment of presbyopia by the US FDA may be an important milestone for investigation of real-world data of pharmacological treatment of presbyopia.
PubMed: 35268476
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11051385