87, 95% CI 0.77, 0.98) were associated with adherence to MAT. Self-efficacy was directly associated with adherence to MAT (β = 0.347, P less then 0.05). SC-43 mouse Perceive benefits (β = 0.276, P less then 0.01) and perceived barriers (β = -0.241, P less then 0.05) were directly associated with self-efficacy. However, perceived benefits (β = 0.096, P less then 0.01) and perceived barriers (β = -0.084, P less then 0.01) were only indirectly associated with adherence to MAT. CONCLUSION The adherence of heroin-dependent patients to MAT can be explained by self-efficacy, perceived benefits and barriers. Self-efficacy plays a significant role as a mediating variable. Future interventions should be considered to improve patients' self-efficacy to MAT.A 31-year-old woman was seen at our clinic with dissatisfying hyperopic error after a myopic laser treatment of her left eye in April 2018. The surgery took place 1 year previously. There were no abnormalities in her medical history.The preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) in the left eye was 20/16 with -7.50 -0.50 × 75. The refraction in the right eye was -3.50 -1.25 × 90. The cycloplegic correction of the left eye preoperatively was -6.50 -0.50 × 68. A femtosecond-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis procedure was performed with an optical zone of 6.3 mm, an ablation zone of 7.97 mm, and a maximum ablation depth of 121 μm. The laser was set at a correction of -7.50 -0.5 × 75. The temperature and humidity during the laser treatment were 20 degrees and 47%, respectively. shows the excimer laser treatment data (AMARIS 750, SCHWIND eye-tech-solutions).At 1 week postoperatively the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 20/25, and at 1 month postoperatively the CDVA was 20/16 with +2.50. Slitlamp examination showed a clear cornea. No corneal topography was made at that timepoint. At referral 7 months later, the patient's UDVA was 20/100 and CDVA was 20/16 with +2.50 -1.25 × 140 in the left eye. The patient reports decreased vision since the treatment in 2018 and wants to see better without spectacles. shows the postoperative Scheimpflug topography of the left eye, flat keratometry (K1) 36.1 @ 178.4 and steep keratometry (K2) 36.6 @ 88.4. What do you believe could be the cause of this overcorrection? What is your advice in terms of correction of the refractive error for this patient?To analyze the visual acuity and complications between primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and contact lens wearing, this literature search was performed with data on patients with congenital cataract younger than 2 years published in March 2019. Seven identified studies enrolling 675 eyes were selected for analysis. Patients with primary IOL implantation owned better visual acuity than those with aphakia who wore the contact lens (weighted mean difference = 0.161; 95% CI, 0.108-0.214). For visual axis opacification (VAO), primary IOL implantation increases the incidence of VAO compared with contact lens wearing (relative risk = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.13-0.42). No statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups about the prevalence of glaucoma and strabismus. Primary IOL implantation achieved better visual outcomes after cataract extraction in patients younger than 2 years. In addition, no higher risk for complications among primary IOL implantation compared with contact lens wearing was noted. Therefore, implanting a primary IOL during congenital cataract surgery is a better therapy for children younger than 2 years than wearing a contact lens.PURPOSE To investigate the efficacy and safety of a cross-linked gel stent (XEN45) with or without cataract surgery in the treatment of glaucoma patients. SETTING Five university hospitals. DESIGN Prospective multicenter clinical trial. METHODS Patients with glaucoma inadequately controlled by treatment or poor compliance or intolerance to topical therapy were included. Patients were divided into those who had an implant only (Solo Group; phakic and pseudophakic patients) and those who had an implant combined with cataract surgery (Combo Group). Differences in mean intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of medications between the baseline preoperative visit and study end (12 months), and the rate of qualified and complete success, were evaluated. RESULTS The Solo Group comprised 115 glaucoma patients (43 phakic and 72 pseudophakic) and the Combo Group comprised 56 patients. Compared with baseline, mean IOP (23.9 ± 7.6 to 15.5 ± 3.9) and number of medications (3.0 ± 1.1 to 0.5 ± 1.0) decreased significantly at 12-month follow-up (P 30% reduction in IOP from baseline was achieved by 72.3% and 52.6% of patients, respectively. IOP at 1 week postoperatively was a predictor of success, and the needling rate was inversely correlated with early postoperative IOP. The number of preoperative medications and patient age were not significantly associated with failure. CONCLUSIONS Insertion of a cross-linked gel stent alone or combined with phacoemulsification might be effective and safe in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma, with a substantial reduction in IOP and number of medications.PURPOSE To compare the long-term refractive effects of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) on the correction of high myopia and astigmatism. SETTING The Eye and ENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China. DESIGN Retrospective case series. METHODS Patients had SMILE or FS-LASIK for high myopia. Subgroup analyses of high myopia (-6.00 to -8.75 diopters [D]) and extremely high myopia (≥-9.00 D) were performed. The main outcome measure was refractive predictability, compared between SMILE and FS-LASIK groups. Secondary outcomes included efficacy, safety, and residual astigmatism. RESULTS This study included 121 patients (121 eyes 75 in the SMILE group and 46 in the FS-LASIK group). No differences were found in terms of refractive predictability between SMILE and FS-LASIK in eyes with high myopia 56% vs 58.7% achieved ± 0.50 D of attempted correction (P = .771) and 81.3% vs 76.1% achieved ± 1.00 D of attempted correction (P = .489).