Literature DB >> 16357642

Comparison of flat and steep rigid contact lens fitting methods in keratoconus.

Karla Zadnik1, Joseph T Barr, Karen Steger-May, Timothy B Edrington, Timothy T McMahon, Mae O Gordon.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to compare the safety and efficacy of flat- and steep-fitting rigid contact lenses in keratoconus.
METHODS: The Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study is a 16-center observational study. Cross-sectional results at baseline were generated for 1091 subjects with longitudinal results from the 871 subjects who completed 8 years of follow up.
RESULTS: Of the 761 rigid contact lens-wearing patients at baseline, 41% had a scar at baseline compared with 24% of the nonrigid contact lens wearers (odds ratio [OR], 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-3.43; p = 0.001). Eighty-seven percent were fitted with flat-fitting lenses, whereas 13% were fitted with steep-fitting lenses. Rigid lens fitting method was also associated with incident corneal scarring. A greater proportion of the corneas wearing flat-fitting contact lenses were scarred (43% compared with 26% for the steep-fitted eyes; OR,= 2.19; 95% CI, 1.37-3.51; p = 0.001). After controlling for corneal curvature, the association of rigid contact lens fit and corneal scarring at baseline did not persist (adjusted OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.70-2.06; p = 0.52). Thirty-two percent of unscarred eyes at baseline fitted flat had developed an incident corneal scar by the eighth year follow-up visit compared with 14% of eyes fitted steep (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.34-6.42; p = 0.007).
CONCLUSIONS: The data reported here indicate that, after controlling for disease severity in the form of corneal curvature, keratoconic eyes fitted with a rigid contact lens resulting in an apical touch fluorescein pattern did not have an increased risk of being scarred centrally at baseline. This "natural history" sample cannot determine causal proof that one method of fitting lenses is safer than another. To achieve this, a randomized clinical trial is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16357642     DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000192349.11525.de

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  9 in total

1.  Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study: methods and findings to date.

Authors:  H Wagner; J T Barr; K Zadnik
Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 3.077

Review 2.  [Keratoconus lenses: the small correction miracle].

Authors:  U Klühspies; A Grunder; S Goebels; F Schirra; B Seitz
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Short-term corneal changes with gas-permeable contact lens wear in keratoconus subjects: a comparison of two fitting approaches.

Authors:  Miguel Romero-Jiménez; Jacinto Santodomingo-Rubido; Patricia Flores-Rodríguez; Jose-Manuel González-Méijome
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-09-04

Review 4.  Current perspectives in the management of keratoconus with contact lenses.

Authors:  Li Lim; Elizabeth Wen Ling Lim
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Tear metabolite changes in keratoconus.

Authors:  D Karamichos; J D Zieske; H Sejersen; A Sarker-Nag; John M Asara; J Hjortdal
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 3.467

6.  Dry Eye Symptoms in Individuals With Keratoconus Wearing Contact Lenses.

Authors:  Ellen Shorter; Jennifer Harthan; Amy Nau; Jennifer Fogt; Dingcai Cao; Muriel Schornack; Cherie Nau
Journal:  Eye Contact Lens       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.152

Review 7.  Nonsurgical Procedures for Keratoconus Management.

Authors:  L Rico-Del-Viejo; M Garcia-Montero; J L Hernández-Verdejo; S García-Lázaro; F J Gómez-Sanz; A Lorente-Velázquez
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 8.  Corneal Crosslinking for Progressive Keratoconus and Corneal Ectasia: Summary of US Multicenter and Subgroup Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Steven A Greenstein; Peter S Hersh
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  [Stage-appropriate treatment of keratoconus].

Authors:  B Seitz; L Daas; L Hamon; K Xanthopoulou; S Goebels; C Spira-Eppig; S Razafimino; N Szentmáry; A Langenbucher; E Flockerzi
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 1.174

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.