Evidence Hub

Myopia Control Efficacy and Long-Term Safety of a Novel Orthokeratology Lens (MESOK Study)—A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Combining Clinical and Tear Proteomics Data

Kai-Yip Choi, Jimmy K W Cheung, G. T. K. Wong, Peter H. Li, S. Chan, Thomas C. Lam, H. H. Chan

Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2023

71 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

Myopia control efficacy and long-term safety of the Breath-O-Correct orthokeratology (OK) lens was evaluated in a 2-year randomized, single vision (SV) spectacle lens-controlled, single-blind clinical trial combining clinical and tear proteomics data. A total of 71 children (43 OK, 9.8 ± 1.3 years; 28 SV, 9.5 ± 1.4 years) completed the 2-year study. Axial length (AL), cycloplegic refraction, clinical safety parameters (best-corrected visual acuity, central cornea thickness, corneal endothelial health, ocular surface disease index), and quantitative tear proteomics were evaluated by masked examiners. Mean 2-year-normalized AL elongations in the OK and SV groups differed significantly (p = 0.03) and were 0.37 ± 0.37 mm and 0.60 ± 0.41 mm, respectively. OK-mediated myopia control efficacy was 37.1%. No significant difference was found in clinical safety parameters of both groups (p > 0.10), except for a thinner central corneal thickness in the OK group (p = 0.01). Proteomics revealed modest OK lens-mediated effects on immune response proteins, including an increased abundance of haptoglobin at 6 and 12 months and a decreased abundance of two proteins (neutrophil defensin 3 and histone 4) at 6 months. The changes were further validated using a high-resolution multiple-reaction monitoring (MRMHR) mass spectrometry. In summary, the Breath-O-Correct OK lens significantly reduced AL elongation in schoolchildren without adverse clinical effects or subclinical inflammatory responses.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 71 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free