The Comparison of Soft HydroCone (Toris K) Silicone Hydrogel and Rigid Gas-Permeable Contact Lenses in Patients With Posterior Microphthalmos.
Journal
Eye & contact lens
ISSN: 1542-233X
Titre abrégé: Eye Contact Lens
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101160941
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Apr 2023
01 Apr 2023
Historique:
accepted:
14
01
2023
pubmed:
23
2
2023
medline:
28
3
2023
entrez:
22
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate and compare soft HydroCone (Toris K) silicone hydrogel and rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) in patients with posterior microphthalmos (PMs), for visual rehabilitation and comfort. The records of 11 patients who were followed up in our hospital with the diagnosis of PM and were fitted with both Toris K and RGPCLs in our contact lens department were reviewed retrospectively. Patient age, gender, axial length (AL), topographic keratometry (K) values and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) with both lens types and subjective lens comfort status were recorded. A total of 22 eyes of 11 patients with a mean age of 20.9±11.1 years were included in the study. The mean AL were 16.01±0.1 and 15.9±0.2 mm in the right and left eyes, respectively. Mean K1 and K2 were 48.6±2.2 and 49.4±2.2 D, respectively. Mean logMAR BCVA of the 22 eyes before contact lens fitting was 0.63±0.56 with spectacle. After Toris K and RGPCLs fitting, mean logMAR BCVA were 0.43±0.20 and 0.35±0.25, respectively. Both lenses provided better visual acuity than spectacles; RGPCLs also provided significantly better visual acuity than HydroCone lens ( P <0.05). Eight of 11 patients (73%) had ocular discomfort with RGPLs, and there was no complaint with Toris K. The corneal surfaces are steeper in patients with PMs than in normal population. For that reason, their vision should be rehabilitated by special design keratoconus lenses like Toris K and RGPCLs. Although vision rehabilitation seems better with RGPCLs, these patients prefer Toris K more because of discomfort.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36811834
doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000978
pii: 00140068-202304000-00008
doi:
Substances chimiques
Hydrogels
0
Silicones
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
168-171Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
Elder MJ. Aetiology of severe visual impairment and blindness in microphthalmos. Br J Ophthalmol 1994;78:332–334.
Relhan N, Jalali S, Pehre N, et al. High-hyperopia database, part I: Clinical characterisation including morphometric (biometric) differentiation of posterior microphthalmos from nanophthalmos. Eye (Lond). 2016;30:120–126.
Ryckewaert M, Zanlonghi X, Bertrand-Cuignet H, et al. High hyperopia with papillomacular fold. Ophthalmologica 1992;204:49–53.
Spitznas M, Gerke E, Bateman JB. Hereditary posterior microphthalmos with papillomacular fold and high hyperopia. Arch Ophthalmol 1983;101:413–417.
Lee S, Ai E, Lowe M, et al. Bilateral macular holes in sporadic posterior microphthalmos. Retina 1990;10:185–188.
Nowilaty SR, Khan AO, Aldahmesh MA, et al. Biometric and molecular characterization of clinically diagnosed posterior microphthalmos. Am J Ophthalmol 2013;155:361–372.e7.
Boynton JR, Purnell EW. Bilateral microphthalmos without microcornea associated with unusual papillomacular retinal folds and high hyperopia. Am J Ophthalmol 1975;79:820–826.
Goldblum D, Mojon DS. Posterior microphthalmos associated with papillomacular fold and high hyperopia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1999;36:351–352.
Kiratli H, Tümer B, Kadayifçilar S. Bilateral papillomacular retinal folds and posterior microphthalmus: New features of a recently established disease. Ophthalmic Genet 2000;21:181–184.
Khairallah M, Messaoud R, Zaouali S, et al. Posterior segment changes associated with posterior microphthalmos. Ophthalmology 2002;109:569–574.
Fledelius HC, Fuchs HJ, Rosenberg T. Oculometric characteristics of extreme hypermetropia in two Faroese families. Optom Vis Sci 2004;81:762–768.
Gumus K, Kahraman N. A new fitting approach for providing adequate comfort and visual performance in keratoconus: Soft hydrocone (Toris K) lenses. Eye Contact Lens 2016;42:225–230.
SwissLens. Keratoconus Soft Contact Lenses [Internet]. 2012. p. 16–17. Available at: https://www.swisslens.ch/products/soft-contact-lenses/hydrocone/
Sultan P, Dogan C, Iskeleli G. A retrospective analysis of vision correction and safety in keratoconus patients wearing Toris K soft contact lenses. Int Ophthalmol 2016;36:799–805.
Ozek D, Kemer OE, Bayraktar N. Hydro cone lens visual performance and impact on quality of life in irregular corneas. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2016;39:458–460.
Yilmaz I, Ozcelik F, Basarir B, et al. Clinical performance of Toris K contact lens in patients with moderate to advanced keratoconus: A real life retrospective analysis. J Ophthalmol 2016;2016:2358901–2358906.
Altun A, Kurna SA, Sengor T, et al. Success of hydrocone (TORIS-K) soft contact lens for keratoconus and traumatic keratopathy. Pak J Med Sci 2015;31:995–998.
Eggink FAGJ, Nuijts RMMA. A new technique for rigid gas permeable contact lens fitting following penetrating keratoplasty. Acta Ophthalmologica Scand 2001;79:245–250.
Gogri P, Bhombal FA. A new technique for fitting of tricurve rigid gas-permeable contact lens in penetrating keratoplasty eyes using Scheimpflug imaging. Indian J Ophthalmol 2020;68:1057–1060.
İskeleli MG, Eroğlu E, Onur U, et al. Evaluation of conflex-air TM 100 UV keratoconus lenses for symptoms and complication. T.Oft.Gaz. 2004 34:14–19.
Bron AJ, Tripathi RC, Tripathi BJ. The Wolff's Anatomy of the Eye and Orbit. 8th ed London, England: Chapman & Hall Medical; 1997.
Rüfer F, Schröder A, Erb C. White to white corneal diameter: Normal values in healthy humans obtained with the Orbscan II topography system. Cornea 2005;24:259–261.
Topuz H, Ozdemir M, Cinal A, et al. Age-related differences in normal corneal topography. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging 2004;35:298–303.
Bourne RRA, Stevens GA, White RA, et al. Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990-2010: A systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2013;1:e339–e349.
Malik TG, Khalil M, Shafiq MM, et al. Increased corneal curvature with posterior nanophthalmos. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2008;18:590–591.
Zeynep Z, Ozkaya A, Karakucuk Y, et al. Detailed ophthalmologic evaluation of posterior microphthalmos. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2014;21:186–188.
Mihara M, Hayashi A, Oiwake T. Posterior microphthalmos with good visual acuity: A case report. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2019;16:100568.
Moore BD, Augsburger AR, Ciner EB, et al. Care of the patient with hyperopia. In: American Optometric Association. Optometric Clinical Practice Guideline [Internet]. St. Louis, MO, AOA; 1997.
Rico-Del-Viejo L, Garcia-Montero M, Hernández-Verdejo JL, et al. Nonsurgical procedures for keratoconus management. J Ophthalmol 2017;2017:1–17.
Karabulut GO, Ozcelik F. Efficacy of fitting HydroCone (Toris K) contact lenses for the visual rehabilitation of patients with posterior microphthalmos. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2022:27492022005005217.