Scleral contact lenses (ScCL) have gained renewed interest during the last decade. Originally, they were primarily used for severely compromised eyes. Corneal ectasia and exposure conditions were the primary indications. However, the indication range of ScCL in contact lens practices seems to be expanding, and it now increasingly includes less severe and even non-compromised eyes, too. All lenses that partly or entirely rest on the sclera are included under the name ScCL in this paper; although the Scleral Lens Education Society recommends further classification. When a lens partly rests on the cornea (centrally or peripherally) and partly on the sclera, it is called a corneo-scleral lens. A lens that rests entirely on the sclera is classified as a scleral lens (up to 25 mm in diameter maximum). When there is full bearing on the sclera, further distinctions of the scleral lens group include mini-scleral and large-scleral lenses. This manuscript presents a review of the current applications of different ScCL (all types), their fitting methods, and their clinical outcomes including potential adverse events. Adverse events with these lenses are rare, but the clinician needs to be aware of them to avoid further damage in eyes that often are already compromised. The use of scleral lenses for non-pathological eyes is discussed in this paper.

Multifocal contact lens correction provided satisfactory levels of VA comparable with MV without compromising stereoacuity in this crossover study. The near vision significantly improved in the dominant eye, and the distance vision improved in the nondominant eye from 1 to 15 days with the MF lens, suggesting that patients adapted to the multifocality overtime, whereas this was not true for MV.

CLs were reported to be well accepted, consistent, and safe methods to address myopia regulation in children. Corneal refractive therapy (orthokeratology) is so far the method with the largest demonstrated efficacy in myopia regulation across different ethnic groups. However, factors such as patient convenience, the degree of initial myopia, and non-CL treatments may also be considered. The combination of different strategies (i.e., central defocus, peripheral defocus, spectral filters, pharmaceutical delivery, and active lens-borne illumination) in a single device will present further testable hypotheses exploring how different mechanisms can reinforce or compete with each other to improve or reduce myopia regulation with CLs.

Stable and progressing myopes of matched age, axial length, and central refraction showed significantly different characteristics in their peripheral retinal shape and astigmatic components of tangential and sagittal power errors. The present findings may help explain the mechanisms that regulate ocular growth in humans.

No abstract

BackgroundTo characterize the axial and off-axis refraction across four meridians of the retina in myopic eyes before and after Orthokeratology (OK) and LASIK surgery.MethodsSixty right eyes with a spherical equivalent (M) between − 0.75 to − 5.25 D (cylinder <− 1.00 D) underwent LASIK (n = 26) or OK (n = 34) to treat myopia. Axial and off-axis refraction were measured with an open-field autorefractometer before and after stabilized treatments. Off-axis measurements were obtained for the horizontal (35° nasal and temporal retina) and vertical (15° superior and inferior retina) meridians, and for two oblique directions (45–225° and 135–315°) up to 20° of eccentricity. The refractive profile was addressed as relative peripheral refractive error (RPRE).ResultsOK and LASIK post-treatment results showed an increase of myopic relative refraction at several eccentric locations. At the four meridians evaluated, the M component of the pre-treatment RPRE values was not statistically different (p > 0.05) from the post-treatment RPRE within 30° and 20° of the central visual field after LASIK and OK, respectively. These results demonstrated that the treatment zone warrants an optimal central field of vision.ConclusionsThe present study gives an overview of RPRE after refractive corneal reshaping treatments (OK and LASIK) across vertical, horizontal and two oblique meridians together. This allows a 3D representation of RPRE at the retina and shows that the myopic shift induced by both treatments is more relevant in horizontal directions.

Purpose. To show the distribution of ocular dominance as measured with sensory and eye sighting methods and its potential relationship with high and low contrast LogMAR visual acuity in presbyopic subjects. Method. Forty-four presbyopes (48.5 ± 3.5 years) participated in this study. Ocular dominance was determined by eye sighting (hole-in-card) and sensorial (+1.50 D lens induced blur) methods. According to the dominance detected with each method (RE: right eye or LE: left eye), patients were classified in dominance type 1 (RE/RE), type 2 (RE/LE), type 3 (LE/RE) and type 4 (LE/LE). Results. Baseline refractive error (MSE) was RE:−0.36 ± 1.67 D and LE:−0.35 ± 1.85 D (P = 0.930). RE was the dominant eye in 61.4% and 70.5% of times as obtained from sensorial and sighting methods, respectively. Most frequent dominance was of type 1 (52.3%), in this case the RE showed statistically significant better distance low contrast LogMAR VA (0.04 LogMAR units) compared to the LE (P < 0.05). Conclusions. The dominance was more frequent in RE in this sample. The eye sighting and sensorial methods to define ocular dominance agreed in more than half of cases. Amount of MSE was not significantly different between dominant and non-dominant eye. But in case of right dominance, the RE presented better distance low contrast VA compared to the LE.

No abstract