Magazine - Universidad Europea
Myopia: 21st century pandemic
César Villa
School of Doctoral Studies and Research
/César Villa
Cristina Álvarez
School of Biomedical and Health Sciences
@cristinauem /Cristina Álvarez

Myopia is a refractive error in which the eyeball is too long for the refraction of the different ocular refraction components.

At birth there is almost no incidence of myopia. Only 2-3% of newborns have it. The condition prevalent at this age is hyperopia, above three diopters (D), in which the opposite situation occurs1. The eyeball is too short for the refractive power of the eye.

In the first few years of life, a process called emmetropization2takes place, in which the eye grows and, therefore, hyperopia is reduced and eliminated. At six years old, the majority of children show signs of emmetropia. The existence of so-called physiologic hyperopia is understood to be around 0.75 diopters. Starting at this time, and although the eye continues to grow until about age 20, it grows into such a shape that refractive changes caused by the greater axial length are compensated by other ocular changes such as a loss of the crystalline lens power.

If that axial growth is not compensated for as stated above, simple myopia will appear. If myopia is present at birth, or in the first few years of emmetropization, it is very likely that the eye has or will reach an axial length over 26 mm. That myopia is then considered a true eye disorder and it is called pathological myopia. This myopia entails implicit problems at the fundus of the eye that may cause significant reductions to visual acuity in adulthood.

It should be highlighted that simple myopia, a priori a refractive error and not a pathology, may turn into a pathology depending on the diopters and/or axial length it reaches. Above 5-6 diopters, or LAX > 26 mm, may induce a significant iatrogenesis such as, among other things, macular degeneration, retinal detachment, or cataracts3. The risk of such complications increases for low (>-2 D), moderate (<-2D – >-5D), and high (<-5D) myopia as shown in Table I.

TABLE I. Increase in Risk of Having Certain Myopic Pathologies Compared to Emmetropic Pathologies with the Number of Diopters of Myopia. Adapted from Filcroft, 2012(3). MMD: Myopic macular degeneration; RD retinal detachment

Prevalence and Etiology

The global presence of myopia is increasing significantly. In 2016 a Holden et al.4 study indicated that in 2010 myopia affected 1.9 billion people in the world: 28% of the global population. By 2050 myopia is expected to affect 5 billion people: in other words 50% of the population. The study also reported that in 2010 high myopia affected 3% of the population while in 2050 it would reach 10%, posing a risk of significantly low vision and blindness. The past, present, and future based on region of the world can be seen in Table II and gives this article its title.

Table II. Changes to the Prevalence of Myopia in Different Regions of the World By Decade from 2000 to 2050, Expressed as a Percentage. Adapted from Holden, 2016 (4).

Our research group (Vision Research Group [GIV]) recently published research regarding the prevalence of refractive errors in children ages 5 to 7 in Spain, finding, as shown in Figure 1, an increase with age of near-sighted children to the detriment of myopic and hypermetropic children5.

Figure 1. Prevalence Rate of Refractive Errors in Spain, Based on Age. Source: Alvarez-Peregrina et al(5).

With regard to its etiology, it was always considered and has recently been demonstrated that there is a significant genetic factor. Therefore, the risk of being near-sighted is tripled and sextupled, respectively, by having one or two near-sighted parents6. In myopia appearing before age six, the genetic component is considered to be predominant. Nevertheless, genetics does not explain the huge changes to the error’s current and future prevalence. It is believed that miopic-genetic factors exist that act on the child starting at age six, such as close work and reading, that may increase existing myopia or cause it to appear starting at that age. Therefore, today myopia is often considered a problem of interaction between genetics, environment, and development7.

Sunlight has been found to prevent against myopia8. Spending more than 2.7 hours per day outdoors, not necessarily engaging in sports, is the right amount, while spending less than 1.5 hours per day increases one’s probability of developing myopia9.

Moreover, race also has an influence on the risk of the appearance of myopia, with Asian people most at risk and Black people the least.

Many of the risk factors for the appearance and rapid progression of myopia are understood and shown in Table III.

TABLE III. Risk of Myopia and Risk Factors for Rapid Progression. CV: close vision; N/A: Not applicable

Compensation and Addressing Myopia

Compensation for myopia is often done with glasses. Their lenses are called negative and are spherical or aspheric. With these lenses, patients go back to having visual acuity in distance vision. However, they do not have any benefit on the progress of the refractive error. In some cases it even seems that the reasons for which myopia appears or progresses increase. According to the latest theories this is due to the existence of a hyperopia in the periphery of the retina and/or a delay in the accommodative function that allows us to focus during close vision (technically accommodative lag).

It has been proven that there will be progression when myopia first appears, and the most attention must be paid to myopia appearing before 10 years of age (between 6 and 10). In these cases and in those in which myopia appears after 10 years of age with above average progression (>0.75 D per year), attempts must be made to control the progression of myopia so that when the patient is an adult their myopia does not surpass 5 or 6 diopters.

Today there are different techniques that have proven to be effective, to a greater or lesser extent, in slowing the progression of simple myopia. They are10:

  1.   Ophthalmic lenses for glasses
  •   bifocal or multifocal lenses, or
  •   special lenses to control myopia called prismatic bifocals
  1.   Contact lenses
  •   Overnight orthokeratology
  •   Soft multifocal and prismatic bifocal lenses
  1.   Pharmacological treatment:
  •   Super-diluted atropine (0.01% concentration)

Table IV details the average control results that may be achieved with each of these techniques.

The GIV recently published the results of a clinical trial (MiSight Assessment Study Spain [MASS]) that it conducted with MiSight® contact lenses, lenses designed and approved for controlling myopia in children and adolescents, compared to a control group using glasses, in children age 8 to 12. Myopic progression in diopters was found to slow with the contact lenses by 39.2% compared to the control group11.

Additionally, optical techniques have begun to be combined with pharmacological techniques in order to increase their effectiveness12.

TABLE IV. Average results found according to different studies carried out on the percent of reduction of myopic progression. B: Bifocal; PB: Prismatic bifocal; CL: Contact lens; M: Multifocal

Each of the above-mentioned options has its own specific advantages and disadvantages and a vision professional, ophthalmologist, optician, or optometrist should be the one to prescribe the best option in each individual case.

In conclusion, in all cases in which simple myopia appears, the Universidad Europea Vision Research Group recommends following the algorithm37 developed by Canadian optometrist Langis Michaud, which is more or less accepted by the vision professional community and shown in Figure 2. Lifestyle, genetic background, and age of appearance are the fundamental pillars when defining a strategy to follow.

Figure 2. Algorithm to Select a Control Strategy at the Appearance of Myopia Considering Age of Appearance, Myopic Progression, and the Risk Factors Discussed in the Article. Adapted from Michaud, 2016 (37).

 

References

  1. Kuo A, Sinatra RB, Donahue SP. (2012). Distribution of refractive error in healthy infants. J AAPOS. 7(3):174-7.
  2. Yebra-Pimentel E, González-Méijome JM, García-Resúa C, Giráldez-Fernández MJ. (2008). [The relationships between ocular optical components and implications in the process of emmetropization]. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2008 May;83(5):307-16.
  3. Flitcroft, D. I. (2012). The complex interactions of retinal, optical and environmental factors in myopia aetiology.  Prog Retin Eye Res 31(6): 622-660.
  4. Holden, B. A., T. R. Fricke, D. A. Wilson, M. Jong, K. S. Naidoo, P. Sankaridurg, T. Y. Wong, T. J. Naduvilath and S. Resnikoff (2016). Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology 123(5): 1036-1042.
  5. Álvarez-Peregrina C, Sánchez-Tena MA, Villa-Collar C. (2018). Prevalencia de errores refractivos en niños de 5 a 7 años [Prevalence of refractive errors in children 5 to 7]. Gaceta de Optometría y Óptica Oftálmica. 539, September.
  6. Zhang X, Qu X, Zhou X. (2015). Association between parental myopia and the risk of myopia in a child. Exp Ther Med. 9(6):2420-2428.
  7. Fredick DR. (2002). Myopia. BMJ. 324(7347): 1195–1199.
  8. Xiong S, Sankaridurg P, Naduvilath T, Zang J, Zou H, Zhu J, Lv M, He X, Xu X. (2017). Time spent in outdoor activities in relation to myopia prevention and control: a meta‐analysis and systematic review. Acta Ophthalmol. 95(6): 551–566.
  9. Gifford K. (2013). Clinical myopia profile. At: http://www.myopicprofile.com.
  1. Ruiz-Pomeda, A., Pérez-Sánchez, B., Valls, I., Prieto-Garrido, F. L., Gutiérrez-Ortega, R., & Villa-Collar, C. (2018). MiSight Assessment Study Spain (MASS). A 2-year randomized clinical trial. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 1-11.

 

  1. Huang J, Wen D, Wang Q, McAlinden C, Flitcroft I, Chen H, Saw SM, Chen H, Bao F, Zhao Y, Hu L, Li X, Gao R, Lu W, Du Y, Jinag Z, Yu A, Lian H, Jiang Q, Yu Y, Qu J. (2016). Efficacy comparison of 16 interventions for myopia control in children: a network meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 123(4):697-708.
  2. Chen Z, Huang S, Zhou J, Xiaomei Q, Zhou X, Xue F. (2018). Adjunctive effect of orthokeratology and low dose atropine on axial elongation in fast-progressing myopic children – A preliminary retrospective study. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. Nov 24 [Epub ahead of print]
  3. Cheng, D., G. C. Woo, B. Drobe and K. L. Schmid (2014). Effect of bifocal and prismatic bifocal spectacles on myopia progression in children: three-year results of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 132(3): 258-264
  4. Berntsen, D. A., L. T. Sinnott, D. O. Mutti and K. Zadnik (2012). A randomized trial using progressive addition lenses to evaluate theories of myopia progression in children with a high lag of accommodation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(2): 640-649.
  5. Correction of Myopia Evaluation Trial 2 Study Group for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator (2011).  Progressive-addition lenses versus single-vision lenses for slowing progression of myopia in children with high accommodative lag and near esophoria.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52(5): 2749-2757.
  6. Edwards, M. H., R. W.-H. Li, C. S.-Y. Lam, J. K.-F. Lew and B. S.-Y. Yu (2002). The Hong Kong progressive lens myopia control study: study design and main findings. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science 43(9): 2852-2858.
  7. Gwiazda, J., L. Hyman, M. Hussein, D. Everett, T. T. Norton, D. Kurtz, M. C. Leske, R. Manny, W. Marsh-Tootle and M. Scheiman (2003). A randomized clinical trial of progressive addition lenses versus single vision lenses on the progression of myopia in children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44(4): 1492-1500.
  8. Yang, Z., W. Lan, J. Ge, W. Liu, X. Chen, L. Chen and M. Yu (2009). The effectiveness of progressive addition lenses on the progression of myopia in Chinese children. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 29(1): 41-48.
  9. Sankaridurg, P., L. Donovan, S. Varnas, A. Ho, X. Chen, A. Martinez, S. Fisher, Z. Lin, E. L. Smith, 3rd, J. Ge and B. Holden (2010).  Spectacle lenses designed to reduce progression of myopia: 12-month results. Optom Vis Sci 87(9): 631-641.
  10. Hasebe, S., J. Jun and S. R. Varnas (2014). Myopia control with positively aspherized progressive addition lenses: a 2-year, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55(11): 7177-7188.
  11. Cho, P. and S. W. Cheung (2012). Retardation of myopia in Orthokeratology (ROMIO) study: a 2-year randomized clinical trial.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(11): 7077-7085.
  12. Cho, P., S. W. Cheung and M. Edwards (2005). The longitudinal orthokeratology research in children (LORIC) in Hong Kong: a pilot study on refractive changes and myopic control.  Curr Eye Res 30(1): 71-80.
  13. Hiraoka, T., T. Kakita, F. Okamoto, H. Takahashi and T. Oshika (2012). Long-term effect of overnight orthokeratology on axial length elongation in childhood myopia: a 5-year follow-up study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(7): 3913-3919.
  14. Kakita, T., T. Hiraoka and T. Oshika (2011). Influence of overnight orthokeratology on axial elongation in childhood myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52(5): 2170-2174.
  15. Santodomingo-Rubido, J., C. Villa-Collar, B. Gilmartin and R. Gutierrez-Ortega (2012). Myopia control with orthokeratology contact lenses in Spain: refractive and biometric changes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(8): 5060-5065.
  16. Walline, J. J., L. A. Jones and L. T. Sinnott (2009). Corneal reshaping and myopia progression.  Br J Ophthalmol 93(9): 1181-1185.
  17. Zhu, M. J., H. Y. Feng, X. G. He, H. D. Zou and J. F. Zhu (2014). The control effect of orthokeratology on axial length elongation in Chinese children with myopia. BMC Ophthalmol 14: 141.
  18. Aller, T. A. and C. Wildsoet (2006). Results of a one-year prospective clinical trial (CONTROL) of the use of bifocal soft contact lenses to control myopia progression.  Ophthal Physiol Opt 26(6).
  19. Anstice, N. S. and J. R. Phillips (2011). Effect of dual-focus soft contact lens wear on axial myopia progression in children. Ophthalmology 118(6): 1152-1161.
  20. Bakaraju, R., P. Xu, X. Chen, M. Ma, S. Song, M. Jong, W. Li, S. Resnikoff and B. A. Holden (2015). Extended depth-of-focus contact lenses can slow the rate of progression of myopia. Association for research in Vision and Ophthalmology. Denver.
  21. Lam, C. S., W. C. Tang, D. Y. Tse, Y. Y. Tang and C. H. To (2014). Defocus Incorporated Soft Contact (DISC) lens slows myopia progression in Hong Kong Chinese schoolchildren: a 2-year randomised clinical trial. Br J Ophthalmol 98(1): 40-45.
  22. Holden, A. B., P. Sankaridurg, P. L. De la Jara, T. Naduvilath, A. Ho, D. F. Sweeney, M. Markoulli, E. L. Smith and J. Ge (2012). Decreasing peripheral hyperopia with distance-centre relatively-plus powered periphery contact lenses reduced the rate of progress of myopia: a 5 year vision Crc study. Association for research in vision and ophthalmology. Fort Lauderdale.
  23. Sankaridurg, P., B. Holden, E. Smith, 3rd, T. Naduvilath, X. Chen, P. L. de la Jara, A. Martinez, J. Kwan, A. Ho, K. Frick and J. Ge (2011). Decrease in rate of myopia progression with a contact lens designed to reduce relative peripheral hyperopia: one-year results. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52(13): 9362-9367.
  24. Walline, J. J., S. Long and K. Zadnik (2004). Daily disposable contact lens wear in myopic children. Optom Vis Sci 81(4): 255-259.
  25. Walline, J. J., K. L. Greiner, M. E. McVey and L. A. Jones-Jordan (2013). Multifocal contact lens myopia control.  Optom Vis Sci 90(11): 1207-1214.
  26. Chia, A., Q. S. Lu and D. Tan (2016). Five-year clinical trial on atropine for the treatment of myopia 2: myopia control with atropine 0.01% eyedrops. Ophthalmology 123(2): 391-399.
  27. Michaud L, Simard P, Marcotte-Collard R. (2016). Defining a strategy for myopia control. Contact Lens Spectrum. March 1.
Tags:  , , ,
ValUE en twitter
ValUE en papel