The Safety and Efficacy of Scleral Lenses in the Treatment of Ametropia Compared with Rigid Gas-Permeable Contact Lenses

蒋倩旎,陈碧池,周佳奇,曾里,薛枫,魏瑞华,陈志
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20230306-00054
2023-01-01
Abstract:Objective::To compare the safety and efficacy of scleral lenses (SLs) and rigid gas-permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) in the treatment of ametropia in adults.Methods::A prospective randomized controlled trail was conducted at Fudan University Eye and ENT Hospital between July 2021 and February 2022. A total of 41 ametropic adults (41 eyes) were enrolled in the study. The participants were randomly assigned to either the control group (RGPCL group) or the intervention group (SL group) using a computerized block group randomization method. The RGPCL group consisted of 21 myopic adults (21 eyes) and the SL group consisted of 20 myopic adults (20 eyes). Follow-up visits were scheduled at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after lens dispensing. The following parameters were compared between the two groups: corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), ocular complications, corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) and polymorphonuclear changes (ECPC), corneal central thickness (CCT), intraocular pressure (IOP) and subjective acceptability scores. Only data from the right eyes were included in the analysis. Repeated measures ANOVA, paired t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed ranks test and Friedman test were used for statistical analysis. Results::There was no statistically significant difference in CDVA and IOP between the two groups at the lens dispensing visit, 1 week, 1 month and 3-month visits (all P>0.05). Likewise there was no statistically significant difference in ECD, ECPC and CCT between the two groups at 3-month visit (all P>0.05). The scores of subjective comfort and subjective visual quality also did not differ significantly between the groups (all P>0.05). However, subjects reported lower levels of operability for the SLs compared to the RGPCLs at the lens dispensing visit, 1 month and 3-month visits ( Z=2.38, P=0.017; Z=2.72, P=0.007; Z=3.70, P<0.001). Regarding cleanability scores, the SL group scored slightly lower than the RGPCL group after 3 months, and this difference was statistically significant ( Z=2.88, P=0.004). No lens-related ocular complications were found in either group during the follow-up period. Conclusions::In adults, sls provide good and consistent correction of vision compared to RGPCLs. Additionally, sls were found to be safe for short-term use.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?