Abstract
Abstract
Background Myopia is the most prevalent form of refractive error that has a major negative impact on visual function and causes blurring of vision. We aimed to determine if Repeated Low-Level Red Light (RLRL) treatment is beneficial in treating childhood myopia in terms of axial length (AL), spherical equivalent refraction (SER), and sub foveal choroidal thickness (SFCT).Methods This systematic review was performed on RLRL for treatment of myopia in Children compared to singe vision spectacles (SVS). We employed the search strategy with key terms myopia and low-level light therapy then we searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. The mean differences (MD) were used to evaluate the treatment effects. Heterogeneity was quantified using I2 statistics and explored by sensitivity analysis.Results Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in our meta-analysis with a total of 833 patients, 407 in treatment group and 426 in control group. At a 3 month follow up period, pooled studies show a statistical difference in AL between RLRL and SVS group (MD = -0.16; 95% CI [-0.19, -0.12], SER (MD = 0.33; 95% CI [0.27, 0.38]), and SFCT (MD = 43.65; 95% CI [23.72, 45.58]). At a 6 month follow up period, pooled studies show a statistical difference in AL between RLRL and SVS group (MD = -0.21; 95% CI [-0.28, -0.15]), SER (MD = 0.46; 95% CI [0.26, 0.65]), and SFCT (MD = 25.07; 95% CI [18.18, 31.95]). At a 12 month follow up period, pooled studies show a statistical difference in AL between RLRL and SVS group (MD = -0.31; 95% CI [-0.42, -0.19]) and SER (MD = 0.63; 95% CI [0.52, 0.73]).Conclusion This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis investigating evidence supporting the efficacy of 650 nm RLRL for myopia control in the short term of 3, 6, and 12 months follow up. The present review revealed the clinical significance of RLRL as a new alternative treatment for myopia control with good user acceptability and no documented functional or structural damage. However, the effect of long-term RLRL treatment and the rebound effect after cessation require further investigation.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference63 articles.
1. 1. - Dolgin E. The myopia boom. Nature. 2015 Mar 19;519(7543):276.
2. 2. - Wong L, Coggon D, Cruddas M, Hwang CH. Education, reading, and familial tendency as risk factors for myopia in Hong Kong fishermen. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 1993 Feb 1;47(1):50 − 3.
3. 3. - Bourne RR, Stevens GA, White RA, Smith JL, Flaxman SR, Price H, Jonas JB, Keeffe J, Leasher J, Naidoo K, Pesudovs K. Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis. The lancet global health. 2013 Dec 1;1(6):e339-49.
4. 4. - Wang J, Li Y, Musch DC, Wei N, Qi X, Ding G, Li X, Li J, Song L, Zhang Y, Ning Y. Progression of myopia in school-aged children after COVID-19 home confinement. JAMA ophthalmology. 2021 Mar 1;139(3):293–300.
5. 5. - Holden BA, Wilson DA, Jong M, Sankaridurg P, Fricke TR, Smith III EL, Resnikoff S. Myopia: a growing global problem with sight-threatening complications. Community eye health. 2015;28(90):35.