Angelica C Scanzera1, Sneha Bontu, Charlotte E Joslin, Timothy McMahon, Mark Rosenblatt, Ellen Shorter. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences (A.C.S., S.B., C.E.J., T.M., M.R., E.S.), University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL; and Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (A.C.S., C.E.J.), School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe indications for scleral contact lens (ScCL) evaluation, previous treatments, and outcomes of patients prescribed ScCL at a tertiary referral center. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed 133 patients evaluated for ScCL between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2015, at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) Contact Lens Service. Patient demographics, ocular history, indications for evaluation, previous treatments, presence of punctate epithelial erosions, number of lenses ordered, follow-up visits, best-corrected visual acuity before ScCL, and visual acuity with ScCL were evaluated. Patients were categorized based on primary indication for ScCL evaluation as ocular surface disease (OSD) or corneal irregularity (CI). The primary outcome was visual acuity. RESULTS: Visual acuity improved from logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution 0.3±0.4 at presentation to 0.1±0.2 with ScCL in all eyes (n=223, P=0.0001), and from 0.3±0.5 to 0.1±0.2 (n=164, P=0.001) in the OSD group and 0.5±0.4 to 0.2±0.2 (n=59, P=0.0001) in the CI group. Seventy percent of patients were evaluated for bilateral ScCL evaluation. Indication for ScCL evaluation was OSD in 71% (n=95) of patients, with 20% having a secondary diagnosis of CI. Corneal irregularity was the primary diagnosis in 29% of patients (n=38), with 50% having a secondary diagnosis of OSD. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular surface disease was common in this tertiary referral patient population and was a primary or secondary indication for ScCL evaluation in 85.7% (n=114) of patients evaluated for ScCL. Scleral contact lenses improved visual outcomes in patients with both primary diagnoses of CI and OSD.
OBJECTIVES: To describe indications for scleral contact lens (ScCL) evaluation, previous treatments, and outcomes of patients prescribed ScCL at a tertiary referral center. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed 133 patients evaluated for ScCL between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2015, at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) Contact Lens Service. Patient demographics, ocular history, indications for evaluation, previous treatments, presence of punctate epithelial erosions, number of lenses ordered, follow-up visits, best-corrected visual acuity before ScCL, and visual acuity with ScCL were evaluated. Patients were categorized based on primary indication for ScCL evaluation as ocular surface disease (OSD) or corneal irregularity (CI). The primary outcome was visual acuity. RESULTS: Visual acuity improved from logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution 0.3±0.4 at presentation to 0.1±0.2 with ScCL in all eyes (n=223, P=0.0001), and from 0.3±0.5 to 0.1±0.2 (n=164, P=0.001) in the OSD group and 0.5±0.4 to 0.2±0.2 (n=59, P=0.0001) in the CI group. Seventy percent of patients were evaluated for bilateral ScCL evaluation. Indication for ScCL evaluation was OSD in 71% (n=95) of patients, with 20% having a secondary diagnosis of CI. Corneal irregularity was the primary diagnosis in 29% of patients (n=38), with 50% having a secondary diagnosis of OSD. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular surface disease was common in this tertiary referral patient population and was a primary or secondary indication for ScCL evaluation in 85.7% (n=114) of patients evaluated for ScCL. Scleral contact lenses improved visual outcomes in patients with both primary diagnoses of CI and OSD.
Authors: Cherie B Nau; Jennifer Harthan; Ellen Shorter; Joseph Barr; Amy Nau; Nicolette T Chimato; David O Hodge; Muriel M Schornack Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.018
Authors: Eef van der Worp; Dina Bornman; Daniela Lopes Ferreira; Miguel Faria-Ribeiro; Nery Garcia-Porta; José M González-Meijome Journal: Cont Lens Anterior Eye Date: 2014-03-12 Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Carina Koppen; Elke O Kreps; Lieselotte Anthonissen; Maarten Van Hoey; Sorcha Ni Dhubhghaill; Louise Vermeulen Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Ellen Shorter; Jennifer Harthan; Cherie B Nau; Amy Nau; Joseph T Barr; David O Hodge; Muriel M Schornack Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.018
Authors: Angelica C Scanzera; Marc Deeley; Charlotte Joslin; Timothy T McMahon; Ellen Shorter Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 2.018