Michael H Bennett1,2,3, Cheng Fb Hui1,2, Hooi G See4, Kwan L Au-Yeung5, Christopher Tan6, Stephanie Watson1,7. 1. Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 2. Department of Diving and Hyperbaric Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 3. Corresponding author: Prince of Wales Clinical School and Academic Director, Wales Anaesthesia, Ground Floor, East Wing Edmund Blackett Building, Prince of Wales Hospital, Barker Street, Randwick, NSW 2031, Australia, m.bennett@unsw.edu.au. 4. Division of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, Princess Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong. 6. Department of Anaesthesia, The Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, Australia. 7. Save Sight Institute, Discipline of Ophthalmology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A temporary myopic shift is a well-recognized complication of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT). Oxidation of proteins in the crystalline lens is the likely cause. Direct exposure of the eye to hyperbaric oxygen may exacerbate the effect. Our aim was to measure the magnitude of the myopic shift over a course of HBOT when using two different methods of oxygen delivery. METHODS: We conducted a randomised trial of oxygen delivery via hood versus oronasal mask during a course of 20 and 30 HBOT sessions. Subjective refraction was performed at baseline and after 20 and 30 sessions. We repeated these measurements at four and 12 weeks after completion of the course in those available for assessment. RESULTS: We enrolled 120 patients (mean age 57.6 (SD 11.2) years; 81% male). The myopic shift was significantly greater after both 20 and 30 sessions in those patients using the hood. At 20 treatments: refractory change was -0.92 D with hood versus -0.52 D with mask, difference 0.40 D (95% CI 0.22 to 0.57, P < 0.0001); at 30 treatments: -1.25 D with hood versus -0.63 with mask, difference 0.62 D (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, P < 0.0001). Recovery was slower and less complete in the hood group at both four and 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS:Myopic shift is common following HBOT and more pronounced using a hood system than an oronasal mask. Recovery may be slower and less complete using a hood. Our data support the use of an oronasal mask in an air environment when possible. Copyright: This article is the copyright of the authors who grant Diving and Hyperbaric Medicine a non-exclusive licence to publish the article in electronic and other forms.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: A temporary myopic shift is a well-recognized complication of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT). Oxidation of proteins in the crystalline lens is the likely cause. Direct exposure of the eye to hyperbaric oxygen may exacerbate the effect. Our aim was to measure the magnitude of the myopic shift over a course of HBOT when using two different methods of oxygen delivery. METHODS: We conducted a randomised trial of oxygen delivery via hood versus oronasal mask during a course of 20 and 30 HBOT sessions. Subjective refraction was performed at baseline and after 20 and 30 sessions. We repeated these measurements at four and 12 weeks after completion of the course in those available for assessment. RESULTS: We enrolled 120 patients (mean age 57.6 (SD 11.2) years; 81% male). The myopic shift was significantly greater after both 20 and 30 sessions in those patients using the hood. At 20 treatments: refractory change was -0.92 D with hood versus -0.52 D with mask, difference 0.40 D (95% CI 0.22 to 0.57, P < 0.0001); at 30 treatments: -1.25 D with hood versus -0.63 with mask, difference 0.62 D (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, P < 0.0001). Recovery was slower and less complete in the hood group at both four and 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Myopic shift is common following HBOT and more pronounced using a hood system than an oronasal mask. Recovery may be slower and less complete using a hood. Our data support the use of an oronasal mask in an air environment when possible. Copyright: This article is the copyright of the authors who grant Diving and Hyperbaric Medicine a non-exclusive licence to publish the article in electronic and other forms.
Entities:
Keywords:
Hyperbaric oxygen; Myopia; Ophthalmology; Side effects; Vision
Authors: F J Giblin; V A Padgaonkar; V R Leverenz; L R Lin; M F Lou; N J Unakar; L Dang; J E Dickerson; V N Reddy Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 3.467