Objective: Evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ear pressure in adolescent myopia using a systematic evaluation methodology. Provide evidence for the clinical application of ear pressure in the treatment of adolescent myopia. Method: Comprehensive retrieval of the full text database of Chinese journals (CNKI), based on the development of strict criteria for inclusion and exclusion. Database, Chongqing Wip Science and Technology Journal Database, and to conduct rigorous screening of literature. Based on a rigorous qualitative evaluation of the included literature using the “bias risk assessment” tool provided by Cochrane Handbook 5.0, qualitative and quantitative analysis using the Review Manager5.3 software. Results: A total of 286 literature were retrieved and included in 9 standard studies, 1 study quality rating was C and the remaining 8 were B. Of these, 2 were comparative studies of ear pressure and acerbic treatment, effective rate: M-H OR was 1.44,95% CI [0.84,2.47], P=0.18 ± 0.05; 3 Comparison of ear pressure and eye care Study, Efficiency: M-H OR is 3.26,95% CI [1.81,5.88], P≈ 0.0001; 4 Comparative study of ear vent pressure and eye drops, Efficiency: M-H OR is 5.18,95% CI [2.12,12.64], P=0.0003 → 0.05. Conclusion: Ear crypt allergy. Sticker Compression reduction adolescent myopia is better than eye drops and drops, may be superior to eye health care, but it is not possible to conclude better than needling treatment. More high-quality RCT studies are needed in the future.

The association between parental myopia and a child's risk of developing the condition is not well understood. Therefore, the present study conducted a meta-analysis of the results of observational studies in order to investigate the association between myopia in parents and their child's risk of developing the condition. The current study systematically examined the databases MEDLINE, Embase and Ovid for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated the data and extracted the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from the suitable studies. Heterogeneity, publication bias and subgroup analyses were performed. The present meta-analysis included 31,677 participants from 16 studies with 8,393 cases of myopia (six prospective cohort, eight cross-sectional and two case-control studies). The OR of giving birth to a child with myopia, according to the prospective cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies, was 1.53 (95% CI, 1.21-1.85), 1.96 (95% CI, 1.53-2.39), and 2.13 (95% CI, 1.79-2.46), respectively, when one parent had myopia, and 2.10 (95% CI, 1.42-2.77), 2.96 (95% CI, 2.21-3.71), and 2.13 (95% CI, 1.79-2.46), respectively, when two parents had myopia. The current study identified a significant positive association between parental myopia and a child's risk of developing myopia. Children of two parents with myopia had a higher risk of developing myopia compared to those with one myopic parent.

PURPOSE: To evaluate potential changes in myopia prevalence in Denmark by revising more than 100 years of myopia research. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. Only studies reporting a myopia prevalence in Denmark were included. Myopia was defined using the definition in individual references. We did not restrict inclusion of studies to specific methods of measuring or evaluating refraction. As refraction changes throughout life, information from available studies was divided in relevant age groups. Chi-squared test was used when analysing the effect of sex and education on myopia prevalence except when the expected values were beneath 5, where Fisher's exact test was used. To further compare the effect of sex, we calculated the odds ratio of being myopic for females compared to males. RESULTS: We identified 29 Danish studies reporting on prevalence of myopia. The studies were performed between year 1882 and 2018. We found no strong evidence of an increase in myopia prevalence in Denmark. Increasing age was associated with an increased myopia prevalence up to the age of 60 years where after the prevalence decreased. Longer education and more intensive educational load were associated with myopia. Fourteen studies compared the prevalence of myopia between males and females and two of these studies found a significant higher prevalence in females. CONCLUSION: We evaluated nearly 140 years of myopia research in Denmark and did not find a convincing change in prevalence of myopia which is in contrast to the high prevalence of myopia reported in some parts of the world and the expected rise in myopia as predicted by WHO.

INTRODUCTION: Myopia (short-sightedness) exhibits high prevalence in East Asia. Methods to mitigate myopia progression are important in preventing the vision-threatening complications associated with high myopia. In this review, we examine the regional epidemiology of myopia and provide updated evidence regarding interventions to slow myopia progression in children. METHODS: We performed a literature search using PubMed from the date of inception through 25 June 2018. Studies involving myopia epidemiology and control of myopia progression were selected; only studies published in English were reviewed. Preference was given to prospective studies, as well as those conducted in Hong Kong or East Asia. RESULTS: Atropine eye drops and pirenzepine eye gel are highly effective for controlling myopia progression in children. Orthokeratology, peripheral defocus contact lenses, bifocal or progressive addition spectacles, and increased involvement in outdoor activities are also effective for controlling myopia progression; however, myopia undercorrection and single vision contact lenses are ineffective. CONCLUSION: Although various methods are effective for controlling myopia progression in children, no curative remedy exists for myopia. Health care professionals should be aware of the available methods, as well as their risks and benefits. Treatment should be individualised and based on the preferences of the patient's family, after full discussion of the risks and benefits of each modality.

AIMS: To investigate the association of the paired box gene 6 (PAX6) with different severities of myopia. METHODS: A total of four haplotype-tagging single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; rs2071754, rs3026354, rs3026390 and rs628224) and two previously reported SNPs (rs644242 and rs662702) in the PAX6 gene were analysed in a Hong Kong Chinese cohort of 1288 myopia subjects (including 252 extreme myopia, 277 high myopia, 393 moderate myopia and 366 mild myopia) and 791 no myopia controls. Allelic association analyses were performed for individual SNPs in different subgroups of myopia and in combined myopia, followed by a meta-analysis of our current data with reported data on PAX6 in myopia. RESULTS: The association of tagging SNPs rs2071754 and rs644242 with extreme myopia could not withstand multiple correction (rs2071754: OR=1.25, P value=0.031; rs644242: OR=1.33, P value=0.032). In the meta-analysis, rs644242 showed an enhanced, significant association with extreme myopia (OR=1.27, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.46, P value=0.001; I2=0%). In contrast, there was no significant association between the PAX6SNPs and high, moderate or mild myopia. No linear correlation was found between the PAX6SNPs and axial length. CONCLUSION: This study provides additional evidence suggesting that the PAX6 SNP rs644242 is associated with extreme myopia but not lower grade myopia. Thus, PAX6 may be implicated in the development or progression into severe myopia. Further longitudinal studies are warranted.

PURPOSE: Myopia is a common cause of vision loss, with uncorrected myopia the leading cause of distance vision impairment globally. Individual studies show variations in the prevalence of myopia and high myopia between regions and ethnic groups, and there continues to be uncertainty regarding increasing prevalence of myopia. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of myopia and high myopia and estimated temporal trends from 2000 to 2050 using data published since 1995. The primary data were gathered into 5-year age groups from 0 to ≥100, in urban or rural populations in each country, standardized to definitions of myopia of -0.50 diopter (D) or less and of high myopia of -5.00 D or less, projected to the year 2010, then meta-analyzed within Global Burden of Disease (GBD) regions. Any urban or rural age group that lacked data in a GBD region took data from the most similar region. The prevalence data were combined with urbanization data and population data from United Nations Population Department (UNPD) to estimate the prevalence of myopia and high myopia in each country of the world. These estimates were combined with myopia change estimates over time derived from regression analysis of published evidence to project to each decade from 2000 through 2050. RESULTS: We included data from 145 studies covering 2.1 million participants. We estimated 1406 million people with myopia (22.9% of the world population; 95% confidence interval [CI], 932-1932 million [15.2%-31.5%]) and 163 million people with high myopia (2.7% of the world population; 95% CI, 86-387 million [1.4%-6.3%]) in 2000. We predict by 2050 there will be 4758 million people with myopia (49.8% of the world population; 3620-6056 million [95% CI, 43.4%-55.7%]) and 938 million people with high myopia (9.8% of the world population; 479-2104 million [95% CI, 5.7%-19.4%]). CONCLUSIONS: Myopia and high myopia estimates from 2000 to 2050 suggest significant increases in prevalences globally, with implications for planning services, including managing and preventing myopia-related ocular complications and vision loss among almost 1 billion people with high myopia.

AIM: To investigate changes of choroidal thickness (ChT) in children with myopia and the effect of current myopia control interventions on ChT. METHODS: Major literature databases were searched for studies relevant to myopia in children. All studies used swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) or enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT) to measure the ChT value. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled to evaluate ChT in myopia children. RESULTS: A total of 11 eligible articles, including 1693 myopic and 1132 non-myopic eyes, were included in the first Meta-analysis. The sub-foveal choroidal thickness (SFCT; WMD=-40.06, 95%CI, -59.36 to -20.75, P<0.001) and ChT at other sectors were significantly thinner in myopic eyes compared with the non-myopic eyes. The Meta-analysis revealed that the ChT decreased horizontally from the temporal sector toward the nasal sector in the pediatric myopia population. Another 11 studies reporting the effect of myopia control interventions were included in the second Meta-analysis for the relationship between myopia control treatments and ChT. SFCT significantly increased after orthokeratology (OK) treatment and OK combined with 0.01% atropine (OKA) treatment (WMD=19.47, 95%CI, 15.96 to 22.98, P<0.001; WMD=21.81, 95%CI, 12.92 to 29.70, P<0.001, respectively). The forest plots showed that SFCT changed little in myopic children receiving 0.01% atropine (P=0.30). Furthermore, the Meta-analysis showed that OK treatment had a stronger effect on the value of SFCT in myopic children as compared with 0.01% atropine (WMD=9.86; 95%CI, -0.21 to 19.93, P=0.05). There is no difference between the treatment with OK and OKA treatment in ChT in myopic children (P=0.37). CONCLUSION: The ChT in myopic eyes is thinner than that in non-myopic eyes in pediatric population. Myopia control interventions including OK and OKA lead to ChT thickening, but other treatments such as 0.01% atropine did not show an increase in ChT.

RECORD STATUS: None CITATION: Pichon Riviere A, Augustovski F, Alcaraz A, Bardach A, Garcia Marti S, Lopez A, Glujovsky D, Regueiro A. Myopia surgery with an intraocular lens in severe myopia. Buenos Aires: Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS). Informe de Respuesta Rapida No.75. 2006

Myopia is a leading cause of visual impairment and has raised significant international concern in recent decades with rapidly increasing prevalence and incidence worldwide. Accurate prediction of future myopia risk could help identify high-risk children for early targeted intervention to delay myopia onset or slow myopia progression. Researchers have built and assessed various myopia prediction models based on different datasets, including baseline refraction or biometric data, lifestyle data, genetic data, and data integration. Here, we summarize all related work published in the past 30 years and provide a comprehensive review of myopia prediction methods, datasets, and performance, which could serve as a useful reference and valuable guideline for future research.

OBJECTIVES: Myopia is the most common ocular disorder associated with increasing risk for chorioretinal degeneration, retinal detachment, and other vision-threatening abnormalities worldwide. Recently, atropine has been becoming a focus of attention due to its role in ameliorating the myopia progression in children. This meta-analysis was conducted to address the efficacy and safety of atropine on myopia in children and the dose-response relationship between atropine and annual rate of myopia progression. METHODS: Controlled clinical trials were retrospectively analyzed to compare atropine and placebo for the treatment of myopia. The primary outcome measure was annual rate of myopia progression after daily atropine application over 1 year. Data were extracted from 6 randomized clinical trials and analyzed using standard meta-analysis and meta-regression methods. RESULTS: Comparing with placebo, the effect size of atropine for retarding myopia progression was 0.773 diopters (D)/year [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.699-0.848]. Regression model, -0.728+1.281log (dose+1), revealed the dose-response relationship between atropine and myopia progression. The estimate of effect for 0.05%, 0.1%, and 0.25% atropine was -0.665 (95% CI: -1.070 to -0.260), -0.606 (95% CI: -0.967 to -0.245), and -0.442 (95% CI: -0.701 to -0.183) D/year respectively, whereas that for 0.5% and 1% was -0.208 (95% CI: -0.435-0.018) and 0.160 (95% CI: -0.293-0.613), respectively, suggesting that myopia might deteriorate at low dose of atropine but not at 0.5% atropine and 1% atropine within the duration of 6-24 months. No serious adverse event was reported during the period of treatment. The major adverse reactions associated with 0.5% and 1% atropine were photophobia, glare, and recurrent allergic blepharitis. Photochromatic lenses or sunglasses with ultraviolet protection could be used to minimize the glare and photophobia. CONCLUSION: In summary, 0.5% and 1% atropine was demonstrated to be effective and safe to ameliorate myopia progression in childhood with low-to-moderate myopia.