Clinical Evaluation of Large Diameter Rigid-Gas Permeable Versus Soft Toric Contact Lenses for the Correction of Refractive Astigmatism. A MultiCenter Study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to address the clinical performance of a large diameter rigid gas permeable lens (LRGP) in a group of subjects with low-to-moderate (0.75-2.75 D) refractive astigmatism. An additional goal was to determine whether soft toric or LRGP contact lenses performed better objectively in the correction of astigmatism and to determine which modality is preferred by subjects. METHODS: This was a multisite prospective cross-over clinical study. Ten asymptomatic contact lens wearers per site (four university clinics) were recruited and randomly assigned to group A or group B. Group A was assigned to start wearing Comfilcon A soft toric lens first, for two weeks, and then crossed over to LRGP lenses (Boston XO, 14.3 mm diameter miniscleral lens). Group B initially wore LRGP lenses and then crossed over to soft toric lenses. For each type of lens worn, low-contrast and high-contrast visual acuity (VA) were evaluated at distance. At the conclusion of the study, after two months, all subjects completed a questionnaire in which they were asked to indicate their preference for one type of lens (soft toric or LRGP) and to rate the quality of vision in day-to-day activities. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 38 (94.7%) subjects completed the study with 75% preferring the vision of the LRGP lens as compared to the soft toric lenses worn in the study. 52.7% expressed a preference to continue with this modality despite only 38.8% reporting that these LRGP lenses are easy or very easy to handle. Wear time, subjective comfort, and subjective vision ratings exhibited no significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of asymptomatic contact lens wearers, LRGP lenses can be considered as a good alternative to soft toric lenses for the correction of refractive astigmatism.

Gas permeable (GP) versus non-GP lens wearers: accuracy of orthokeratology in myopia reduction.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study is to determine whether there are significant differences in visual and refractive outcomes between gas permeable (GP) and non-GP wearers following a 1-month period of overnight orthokeratology (OK). METHODS: The study included 14 subjects between the ages of 18 and 42 years. Group 1 consisted of six subjects wearing GP lenses for the correction of myopia for, at minimum, 1 year. Group 2 consisted of eight subjects wearing soft contact lenses or spectacles for the correction of myopia. All subjects were fit into the BE design in Boston XO material and lenses were worn for a period of 1 month. Unaided visual acuity using high (90%) and low (10%) contrast log MAR Bailey-Lovie vision charts, subjective refraction, corneal topography, and slit lamp evaluation were performed. Subjects were evaluated at day 1, 7, 14, 21, and 30. RESULTS: One eye of each subject was considered for analysis; the eye with the better response was chosen based on post-OK measures. The mean post-OK spherical equivalent was 0.29 +/- 0.55 D in the GP group and 0.37 +/- 0.46 D in the non-GP group; the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.03). Baseline astigmatism decreased in the non-GP group after OK while there was no significant change in the GP group. The mean high contrast acuities were 0.06 +/- 0.12 in the GP group and 0.17 +/- 0.07 in the non-GP group (p = 0.05), whereas the low contrast acuities were 0.18 +/- 0.17 in the GP and 0.02 +/- 0.09 in the non-GP group (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although the non-GP group has higher post-OK visual acuity and spherical equivalent statistically, the GP group has attained an average unaided acuity of >20/20 and residual myopia <0.5 D. Clinically, this shows that OK can be a promising technique in GP wearers.