ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate bilateral axial length (AL) growth patterns and interactions of myopic eyes in anisometropic children during unilateral orthokeratology (OK) treatment in their singularly myopic eyes (Eyes1), followed by bilateral treatment when their second eyes (Eyes2) developed myopia. METHODS: This study enrolled 94 eyes from 47 anisometropes (20 males). All patients had undergone monocular OK treatment for > 1 year followed by binocular treatment for > 1 year. Axial growth of Eyes1 and Eyes2 during the first year of monocular treatment (Stage 1), average annual axial elongation during the monocular treatment period, and axial elongation during the first year of binocular treatment (Stage 2) were respectively termed: S1E1 and S1E2, Annual E1 and Annual E2, and S2E1 and S2E2. Associations between AL growth and age, sex, interval time, and ocular parameters were analysed using correlation and generalised estimating equation (GEE) analysis. RESULTS: During the monocular period, Eyes1 showed less AL growth (S1E1: 0.05 ± 0.18 mm; Annual E1: 0.05 ± 0.21 mm) than Eyes2 (S1E2: 0.51 ± 0.24 mm; Annual E2: 0.52 ± 0.25 mm) (all p < 0.001). During the binocular period, there was no significant difference between S2E1 and S2E2(0.21 ± 0.14 mm v. 0.19 ± 0.17 mm, p = 0.951). Between monocular and binocular periods, Eyes1 had significantly higher S2E1 compared to S1E1 and Annual E1 (both p < 0.001), and Eyes2 had significantly lower S2E2 than S1E2 and Annual E2 (both p < 0.001). In the GEE model, spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and between periods interval time showed independently significant associations with AL growth after adjusting for age and sex. CONCLUSION: Orthokeratology can significantly control AL growth in unilateral myopia. AL growth of the initial myopic OK-treated eyes accelerated relative to the monocular period when contralateral eyes developed myopia and assumed OK treatment. During the binocular treatment phase, OK lenses showed moderate and comparable effects on AL retardation across both eyes.
ABSTRACT
Importance: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment through intravitreal or subretinal administrations has been proven effective for VEGF-driven pediatric vitreoretinal diseases but are not feasible for advanced cases, such as shallow traction retinal detachments or peripheral circumferential retinal detachments which adhere to the lens. Intra-anterior chamber injection (IAcI) of anti-VEGF may be a viable alternative in such cases but needs evaluation. Objective: To investigate the effects and safety of IAcI of anti-VEGF to treat VEGF-driven pediatric vitreoretinal diseases. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective observational case series study conducted at Xinhua Hospital, affiliated with Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in China. The study included 14 eyes of 13 children diagnosed with vitreoretinal disease exhibiting elevated vascular activity between January and August 2023. Intervention: IAcI with ranibizumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: Retinal vascular abnormalities, vitreous hemorrhage resolution, and complications 1 month and 3 months after injection. Results: Of 13 patients included in this study, 12 were male. The mean age was 4.6 years (range, 1 month to 9 years). Six patients were diagnosed with familial exudative vitreoretinopathy, 4 with morning glory syndrome, 1 with retinopathy of prematurity, and 2 with chronic retinal detachments of unknown causes. At 1-month postoperative follow-up, vascular activity had decreased in 14 of 14 eyes. At 3-month follow-up, vascular activity had resolved in 7 of 14 eyes, persisted in 6 of 14 eyes, and reactivated in 1 of 14 eyes. On final observation, no complications were reported. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings support the possibility of treatment using IAcI with ranibizumab to decrease retinal vascular abnormalities in familial exudative vitreoretinopathy or retinopathy of prematurity or related conditions, but further studies are needed to understand more precise benefits and risks. This approach might be considered in cases where intravitreal or subretinal injection are not feasible, recognizing the limitations of these findings and that longer-term outcomes still need to be monitored.
