Suppr超能文献

硅水凝胶与水凝胶日抛型隐形眼镜的比较

Comparison of Silicone Hydrogel and Hydrogel Daily Disposable Contact Lenses.

作者信息

Diec Jennie, Tilia Daniel, Thomas Varghese

机构信息

Brien Holden Vision Institute (J.D., D.T., V.T.), Sydney, Australia; and School of Optometry and Vision Science (D.T.), UNSW, Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Eye Contact Lens. 2018 Sep;44 Suppl 1:S167-S172. doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000363.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare subjective, objective and safety performance of silicone hydrogel (SiHy) daily disposable (DD) with hydrogel (Hy) DD contact lenses.

METHOD

Retrospective analysis on approximately 40 participants (Px) each in 5 trials. Lenses grouped into SiHy (delefilcon A, somofilcon A, narafilcon A) and Hy (omafilcon A, nelfilcon A). Participants attended follow-up visits at baseline, 2 weeks, 1 and 3 months. Subjective ratings (1-10 scale), adverse events (percentage of Px), physiological variables (0-4 scale), and wearing time were collected at each visit and compared between groups.

RESULT

Trials enrolled 201 Px totally. No differences in age, sex, and lens wear experience were found between SiHy and Hy groups (P≥0.09). There was greater increase in limbal redness from baseline in Hy group (0.18±0.38 vs. 0.02±0.47, P<0.001), whereas conjunctival staining and indentation were less in Hy group (P<0.001). No differences in comfortable wearing time were found between groups (P=0.41), and comfort at insertion, during day, and end of day was also no different (P≥0.71). Incidence of corneal infiltrative events (SiHy vs. Hy: 6.7% vs. 2.5%; P=0.32) and mechanical adverse events (SiHy vs. Hy: 0.0% vs. 0.0%; P=1.00) were no different.

CONCLUSION

Though some statistical significance was found between the groups, these differences were within measurement error. Neither material types showed superiority in comfort, and adverse event rates were low with both material types. These findings suggest that choice of material is a patient and practitioner preference; however, for patients at risk of hypoxia-related complications, SiHy materials should be considered.

摘要

目的

比较硅水凝胶(SiHy)日抛型(DD)与水凝胶(Hy)日抛型隐形眼镜的主观、客观和安全性能。

方法

对5项试验中每项试验约40名参与者(Px)进行回顾性分析。镜片分为SiHy组(delefilcon A、somofilcon A、narafilcon A)和Hy组(omafilcon A、nelfilcon A)。参与者在基线、2周、1个月和3个月时进行随访。每次随访时收集主观评分(1 - 10分制)、不良事件(Px百分比)、生理变量(0 - 4分制)和佩戴时间,并在组间进行比较。

结果

试验共纳入201名Px。SiHy组和Hy组在年龄、性别和镜片佩戴经验方面无差异(P≥0.09)。Hy组角膜缘发红较基线有更大程度增加(0.18±0.38对0.02±0.47,P<0.001),而Hy组结膜染色和压痕较少(P<0.001)。两组在舒适佩戴时间上无差异(P = 0.41),在插入时、白天和一天结束时的舒适度也无差异(P≥0.71)。角膜浸润事件发生率(SiHy组对Hy组:6.7%对2.5%;P = 0.32)和机械性不良事件发生率(SiHy组对Hy组:0.0%对0.0%;P = 1.00)无差异。

结论

尽管两组之间发现了一些统计学意义,但这些差异在测量误差范围内。两种材料类型在舒适度方面均未显示出优势,且两种材料类型的不良事件发生率均较低。这些发现表明材料的选择是患者及从业者的偏好;然而,对于有缺氧相关并发症风险的患者,应考虑使用SiHy材料。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验