Yelda Yıldız Taşcı, Özge Saraç, Nurullah Çağıl, Nilüfer Yeşilırmak
{"title":"混合型隐形眼镜与硬质透气性隐形眼镜治疗中晚期圆锥角膜的比较。","authors":"Yelda Yıldız Taşcı, Özge Saraç, Nurullah Çağıl, Nilüfer Yeşilırmak","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2022.82754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to compare the clinical results and topographic data of the new generation hybrid contact lens (HCL) and rigid gas-permeable contact lens (RGPCL) in patients with moderate and advanced keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective study, HCL users comprised group 1 and RGPCL users comprised group 2. Snellen uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and lens-corrected visual acuity (LCVA); manifest spherical-cylindrical values; corneal topography measurements (flat keratometry [K1], vertical keratometry [K2], mean K, maximum K [K<sub>max</sub>], central corneal thickness [CCT], and thinnest corneal thickness [TCT]); and cone location were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 83 eyes of 51 patients in group 1 and 61 eyes of 40 patients in group 2. The groups were similar in age and gender (p>0.05). Mean LCVA (logMAR) was significantly lower than BCVA in both groups (p<0.001). The mean visual gain with contact lenses (Snellen chart) was 3.4±1.8 lines in group 1 and 4.0±2.1 lines in group 2. There was no significant difference between the two groups in BCVA, LCVA, or lines gained (p>0.05). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in terms of keratoconus stages, mean K<sub>max</sub>, CCT, TCT, or cone location (p>0.05), while mean UCVA (logMAR) and mean K were higher in group 2 (p<0.05). In both groups, the visual gain with lenses was higher in eyes with central cones, and there was significantly greater visual increase in group 2 (p=0.039).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In moderate and advanced keratoconus, HCLs improved vision as much as RGPCLs and both lenses were more effective for central cones. Nevertheless, longer term of follow-up and larger numbers of patients are needed for long term follow-up results of HCL.</p>","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5b/9b/TJO-53-142.PMC10286838.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Hybrid Contact Lenses and Rigid Gas-Permeable Contact Lenses in Moderate and Advanced Keratoconus.\",\"authors\":\"Yelda Yıldız Taşcı, Özge Saraç, Nurullah Çağıl, Nilüfer Yeşilırmak\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2022.82754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to compare the clinical results and topographic data of the new generation hybrid contact lens (HCL) and rigid gas-permeable contact lens (RGPCL) in patients with moderate and advanced keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective study, HCL users comprised group 1 and RGPCL users comprised group 2. Snellen uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and lens-corrected visual acuity (LCVA); manifest spherical-cylindrical values; corneal topography measurements (flat keratometry [K1], vertical keratometry [K2], mean K, maximum K [K<sub>max</sub>], central corneal thickness [CCT], and thinnest corneal thickness [TCT]); and cone location were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 83 eyes of 51 patients in group 1 and 61 eyes of 40 patients in group 2. The groups were similar in age and gender (p>0.05). Mean LCVA (logMAR) was significantly lower than BCVA in both groups (p<0.001). The mean visual gain with contact lenses (Snellen chart) was 3.4±1.8 lines in group 1 and 4.0±2.1 lines in group 2. There was no significant difference between the two groups in BCVA, LCVA, or lines gained (p>0.05). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in terms of keratoconus stages, mean K<sub>max</sub>, CCT, TCT, or cone location (p>0.05), while mean UCVA (logMAR) and mean K were higher in group 2 (p<0.05). In both groups, the visual gain with lenses was higher in eyes with central cones, and there was significantly greater visual increase in group 2 (p=0.039).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In moderate and advanced keratoconus, HCLs improved vision as much as RGPCLs and both lenses were more effective for central cones. Nevertheless, longer term of follow-up and larger numbers of patients are needed for long term follow-up results of HCL.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5b/9b/TJO-53-142.PMC10286838.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2022.82754\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2022.82754","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Hybrid Contact Lenses and Rigid Gas-Permeable Contact Lenses in Moderate and Advanced Keratoconus.
Objectives: We aimed to compare the clinical results and topographic data of the new generation hybrid contact lens (HCL) and rigid gas-permeable contact lens (RGPCL) in patients with moderate and advanced keratoconus.
Materials and methods: In this prospective study, HCL users comprised group 1 and RGPCL users comprised group 2. Snellen uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and lens-corrected visual acuity (LCVA); manifest spherical-cylindrical values; corneal topography measurements (flat keratometry [K1], vertical keratometry [K2], mean K, maximum K [Kmax], central corneal thickness [CCT], and thinnest corneal thickness [TCT]); and cone location were recorded.
Results: The study included 83 eyes of 51 patients in group 1 and 61 eyes of 40 patients in group 2. The groups were similar in age and gender (p>0.05). Mean LCVA (logMAR) was significantly lower than BCVA in both groups (p<0.001). The mean visual gain with contact lenses (Snellen chart) was 3.4±1.8 lines in group 1 and 4.0±2.1 lines in group 2. There was no significant difference between the two groups in BCVA, LCVA, or lines gained (p>0.05). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in terms of keratoconus stages, mean Kmax, CCT, TCT, or cone location (p>0.05), while mean UCVA (logMAR) and mean K were higher in group 2 (p<0.05). In both groups, the visual gain with lenses was higher in eyes with central cones, and there was significantly greater visual increase in group 2 (p=0.039).
Conclusion: In moderate and advanced keratoconus, HCLs improved vision as much as RGPCLs and both lenses were more effective for central cones. Nevertheless, longer term of follow-up and larger numbers of patients are needed for long term follow-up results of HCL.
期刊介绍:
The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.