Efficacy, tolerability, and threshold effect of atropine eye drops for myopia control: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.

Abstract

Atropine is an emerging therapy for myopia, yet the optimal concentration for prescription remains uncertain. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov registry platforms. We included the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared any dose of atropine against a placebo in myopic children. Among 3566 studies assessed, we identified 33 eligible RCTs involving 6301 children aged 4-18 years, with 10 different concentrations and a mean follow-up time of 19.5&#x202f;&#xb1;&#x202f;12.3 months. A nonlinear relationship was observed between atropine dosage and treatment efficacy (P&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.001). Compared to placebo groups, the mean differences in reducing annual spherical equivalent refraction progression for atropine concentrations of 0.01%, 0.02%, 0.03%, 0.04%, and 0.05% were 0.21 diopters (D) (95% CI, 0.13-0.28), 0.35 D (95% CI, 0.23-0.46), 0.42 D (95% CI, 0.28-0.56), 0.45 D (95% CI, 0.30-0.60), and 0.46 D (95% CI, 0.32-0.61) respectively For higher concentrations, the estimates were 0.49 D (95% CI, 0.34-0.63) for 0.1% and 0.99 D (95% CI, 0.66-1.31) for 1%, although these were based on fewer and smaller trials. Higher doses of atropine were associated with decreased amplitude of accommodation (P&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.02), increased pupil diameters (P&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.01) and a higher frequency of photophobia (P&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.02). Our findings suggest that the increase in treatment efficacy with higher concentrations may plateau beyond a certain range, and that the current practice of increasing atropine concentrations for children who show inadequate responses to lower doses should be confined to a specific concentration range. This analysis is limited by the number, design heterogeneity, and sample sizes of available trials for higher concentrations, and by the frequent lack of pre-intervention refractive history in included studies. Therefore, estimates-particularly for doses exceeding 0.1%-should be interpreted with caution.