MiYOSMART iQ vs Stellest 2.0 | DETAILED Analysis of 2nd Generation Lenses

Summary

Dr. Jennifer Wan compares the second-generation myopia-control lenses Stellest 2.0 and MiYOSMART iQ, focusing on their design changes and the study results available when the video was made.

Design updates

• Stellest 2.0

  • Uses the upgraded H.A.L.T MAX design.
  • Doubles the depth of the volume of defocused light compared with the original design, positioning that light farther in front of the retina.
  • Expands the treatment area from 11 to 12 rings by adding an outer ring of lenslets.

• MiYOSMART iQ

  • Uses DIMS TED (“triple enhanced design”).
  • Increases the defocus power of its segments from +3.50 to +4.50.
  • Expands its treatment area by adding an outer band of segments.
  • Adds an inner ring of defocus segments, making the clear central zone smaller.

Study results presented

Stellest 2.0 study

• Included 50 children, who wore Stellest in one eye and Stellest 2.0 in the other. The lenses were switched between eyes after six months.
• Axial length was measured at six and 12 months.
• The presenter reports that Stellest 2.0 slowed axial elongation 59% more than the original at six months and 46% more at 12 months.

MiYOSMART iQ study

• Included 199 children assigned to single-vision lenses, MiYOSMART/DIMS, or MiYOSMART iQ/DIMS TED.
• Refraction and axial length were measured at six months.
• The presenter reports 85% greater efficacy for MiYOSMART iQ than the original MiYOSMART design at six months. The iQ group’s average axial-length change was described as about 0.01 mm.
• Twelve-month results had not been published at the time of the video.

The presenter notes that the results come from different studies, so they do not establish a direct, head-to-head comparison between Stellest 2.0 and MiYOSMART iQ.

Rationale for MiYOSMART iQ’s smaller clear zone

The video discusses a study called “Retinal sweet spot for myopia treatment.” It examines which retinal areas may respond most to positive defocus signals—light focused in front of the retina, which is associated with slowing eye elongation.

According to the study as described in the video:

• The near-peripheral retina, around 6–10 degrees from the center, may be the most responsive area.
• This region has a mix of long-, medium-, and short-wavelength cone receptors that may help detect blur and respond to defocus.
• The central fovea and far peripheral retina were described as less responsive to these signals.
• The presenter suggests that MiYOSMART iQ’s added inner ring may place more defocus segments in this proposed “sweet spot,” which could help explain its six-month results.

Main takeaway

Both second-generation designs increase defocus strength and broaden their treatment zones. MiYOSMART iQ also adds segments closer to the center of the lens. The presenter views these as promising design improvements, while noting that longer-term results—especially for MiYOSMART iQ—were still pending.

Speakers and sources featured

• Dr. Jennifer Wan — the video’s narrator and presenter; her name is rendered slightly differently in the auto-generated subtitles.
• “Retinal sweet spot for myopia treatment” study — discussed as research on which retinal region may be most responsive to defocus.
• Stellest 2.0 study — the 50-child study comparing the two Stellest designs, as described by the presenter.
• MiYOSMART iQ study — the 199-child, three-group study, as described by the presenter.