Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeTo evaluate the effects of 0.01% and 0.02% atropine eye drops on myopia progression, pupil diameter and accommodative amplitude in myopic children.MethodsA cohort study assessed 400 myopic children divided into three groups: 138 and 142 children were randomised to use either 0.02% or 0.01% atropine eye drops, respectively. They wore single-vision (SV) spectacles, with one drop of atropine eye drop applied to both eyes once nightly. Control children (n=120) only wore SV spectacles. Repeated measurements of spherical equivalent refractive errors (SERs), axial length (AL), pupil diameter and accommodative amplitude were performed at baseline, and 4, 8 and 12 months after treatment.ResultsAfter 12 months, the SER change was −0.38±0.35D, −0.47±0.45D, −0.70±0.60D and AL change was 0.30±0.21 mm, 0.37±0.22 mm, 0.46±0.35 mm in the 0.02%, 0.01% atropine and control groups, respectively. There were significant differences in the change in AL and SER between three groups (all p<0.001). Between baseline and the 12-month visit, the overall change in accommodative amplitude was 1.50±0.25D, 1.61±0.31D and change in pupil diameter was 0.78±0.42 mm, 0.69±0.39 mm, with 0.02% and 0.01% atropine, respectively. Accommodative amplitude significantly decreased and pupil diameter significantly increased in two atropine groups (all p<0.001). Moreover, there was no statistical difference in the change difference in accommodative amplitude and pupil diameter between two atropine groups (p=0.24, p=0.38), whereas the accommodative amplitude (p=0.45) and pupil diameter (p=0.39) in the control group remained stable.Conclusions0.02% atropine eye drops had a better effect on myopia progression than 0.01% atropine, but 0.02% and 0.01% atropine showed similar effects on pupil diameter and accommodative amplitude after 12 months of treatment.Trial registration numberChiCTR-IPD-16008844.

Background Retinal prosthesis systems (RPS) are a novel treatment for profound vision loss in outer retinal dystrophies. Ideal prostheses would offer stable, long-term retinal stimulation and reproducible spatial resolution in a portable form appropriate for daily life. Methods We report a prospective, internally controlled, multicentre trial of the Argus II system. Twenty-eight subjects with light perception vision received a retinal implant. Controlled, closed-group, forced-choice letter identification, and, open-choice two-, three- and four-letter word identification tests were carried out. Results The mean±SD percentage correct letter identification for 21 subjects tested were: letters L, T, E, J, F, H, I, U, 72.3±24.6% system on and 17.7±12.9% system off; letters A, Z, Q, V, N, W, O, C, D, M, 55.0±27.4% system on and 11.8%±10.7% system off, and letters K, R, G, X, B, Y, S, P, 51.7±28.9% system on and 15.3±7.4% system off. (p<0.001 for all groups). A subgroup of six subjects was able to consistently read letters of reduced size, the smallest measuring 0.9 cm (1.7°) at 30 cm, and four subjects correctly identify unrehearsed two-, three- and four-letter words. Average implant duration was 19.9 months. Conclusions Multiple blind subjects fitted with the Argus II system consistently identified letters and words using the device, indicating reproducible spatial resolution. This, in combination with stable, long-term function, represents significant progress in the evolution of artificial sight.

Background/AimTo assess visual acuity (VA) outcomes and antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) treatment intensity in diabetic macular oedema (DMO).MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed in treatment-naïve patients with DMO from 2013 to 2018 using a database of aggregated de-identified electronic medical records (Vestrum Health).ResultsAt 1 year, 28 658 patient eyes underwent a mean of 6.4 anti-VEGF injections, gaining a mean of +4.2 letters (95% confidence interval for mean gain: +4.0 to +4.5 letters, p<0.001). When stratified by anti-VEGF medication and by years 2013–2018, no clinically meaningful differences in injection frequency or 1-year VA change resulted. At 1 year, 50% of eyes received ≤6 injections, while <20% received 10–13 injections, representing monthly treatment. Mean letters gained at 1 year generally showed a linear relationship with mean number of anti-VEGF injections, beyond two injections. Eyes with good baseline VA (≥20/40) generally were at risk of VA loss at 1 year; those with moderately severe baseline impairment (20/70 to 20/200) who received ≥10 injections improved by a mean of +10.3 letters.ConclusionIn clinical practice, patients with DMO undergo fewer anti-VEGF injections and exhibit worse visual gains compared with patients in randomised clinical trials. Visual outcomes correlate with treatment intensity at 1 year, with ceiling effects related to baseline VA.

AimTo report refractive error prevalence and visual impairment in Republic of Ireland (henceforth 'Ireland') schoolchildren.MethodsThe Ireland Eye Study examined 1626 participants (881 boys, 745 girls) in two age groups, 6–7 years (728) and 12–13 years (898), in Ireland between June 2016 and January 2018. Participating schools were selected by stratified random sampling, representing a mix of school type (primary/postprimary), location (urban/rural) and socioeconomic status (disadvantaged/advantaged). Examination included monocular logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) presenting visual acuity (with spectacles if worn) and cycloplegic autorefraction (1% Cyclopentolate Hydrochloride). Parents completed a questionnaire to ascertain participants’ lifestyle.ResultsThe prevalence of myopia (spherical equivalent refraction (SER): ≤−0.50 D), hyperopia (SER: ≥+2.00 D) and astigmatism (≤−1.00 DC) among participants aged 6–7 years old was 3.3%, 25% and 19.2%, respectively, and among participants aged 12–13 years old was 19.9%, 8.9% and 15.9%, respectively. Astigmatic axes were predominately with-the-rule. The prevalence of ‘better eye’ presenting visual impairment (≥0.3 logMAR, with spectacles, if worn) was 3.7% among younger and 3.4% among older participants. Participants in minority groups (Traveller and non-white) were significantly more likely to present with presenting visual impairment in the ‘better eye’.ConclusionsThe Ireland Eye Study is the first population-based study to report on refractive error prevalence and visual impairment in Ireland. Myopia prevalence is similar to comparable studies of white European children, but the levels of presenting visual impairment are markedly higher than those reported for children living in Northern Ireland, suggesting barriers exist in accessing eye care.

Background/objective To evaluate the visual performance of a purely refractive extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL). Subjects/methods A prospective, multi-center, randomized, subject/evaluator-masked study. Subjects were bilaterally implanted with the EDF test (Model ZEN00V, TECNIS PureSee™ IOL, N  = 60) or an enhanced monofocal control (Model ICB00, TECNIS Eyhance™ IOL, N  = 57) IOL. Monocular corrected distance (CDVA), intermediate (DCIVA), near acuities (DCNVA) and patient reported visual symptoms were evaluated at the 6-month visit. Monocular mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) and depth of focus (DOF) testing were assessed at 3 months. Results CDVA (Mean ± SD) was −0.06 ± 0.08 for test and −0.05 ± 0.08 logMAR for control groups. DCIVA was 0.13 ± 0.08 for test and 0.18 ± 0.14 logMAR for control groups ( p  = 0.0127). DCNVA was 0.37 ± 0.10 for test and 0.43 ± 0.16 logMAR for control groups ( p  = 0.0137). Test lens was statistically superior for intermediate and near. Overall, 91.7% (halos), 95.0% (starbursts) and 95.0% (glare) of test lens patients reported that they did not experience, were not bothered, or were slightly bothered by specific visual symptoms, compared to 98.2%, 100% and 96.5% in the control group. The DOF range over which monocular visual acuity was 0.20 logMAR or better was −1.6 D for the test lens. Mesopic CS was comparable between both groups, falling within 0.11 log units for all measured cycles per degree with and without glare. Conclusion The EDF IOL demonstrated extended range of vision and statistically superior intermediate and near performance compared to the monofocal IOL. Distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and dysphotopsia profile were similar to the monofocal IOL.

PurposeTo compare clinical outcomes of bilateral implantation of hybrid multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) versus mix-and-match implantation of hybrid multifocal and extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) versus mix-and-match implantation of hybrid multifocal and enhanced monofocal IOLs.MethodsPatients with bilateral age-related cataract were randomised in one of three groups: group 1, bilateral hybrid multifocal IOL; group 2, EDOF in the dominant eye, hybrid multifocal in the non-dominant eye; group 3, enhanced monofocal in the dominant eye, hybrid multifocal in the non-dominant eye. Assessments at 6 months postoperatively included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near distance (UNVA) at 40 and 33 cm, defocus curves, contrast sensitivity (CS), reading speed and questionnaires on quality of vision and dysphotopsia.Results75 patients (25 per group) were enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences in binocular UDVA and UNVA between groups (p>0.05); binocular UIVA was better for group 1 and 2 versus group 3 (p=0.030). Binocular uncorrected defocus curve showed better performance for group 1 compared with group 3 from −2.00 to −3.50 D. Significantly higher reading speed was measured for Jaeger 1 font in group 1. There were no differences in CS between groups, but higher incidence of starbursts in group 1 and higher need for near spectacles in group 3.ConclusionBilateral hybrid multifocal IOL implantation resulted in better near vision, but higher rates of photic phenomena compared with the mix-and-match groups. Combinations of IOLs may allow surgeons to fine-tune for individual patient’s needs.

Abnormal visual experience during a sensitive period of development disrupts neuronal circuitry in the visual cortex and results in abnormal spatial vision or amblyopia. Here we examined whether playing video games can induce plasticity in the visual system of adults with amblyopia. Specifically 20 adults with amblyopia (age 15-61 y; visual acuity: 20/25-20/480, with no manifest ocular disease or nystagmus) were recruited and allocated into three intervention groups: action videogame group (n = 10), non-action videogame group (n = 3), and crossover control group (n = 7). Our experiments show that playing video games (both action and non-action games) for a short period of time (40-80 h, 2 h/d) using the amblyopic eye results in a substantial improvement in a wide range of fundamental visual functions, from low-level to high-level, including visual acuity (33%), positional acuity (16%), spatial attention (37%), and stereopsis (54%). Using a cross-over experimental design (first 20 h: occlusion therapy, and the next 40 h: videogame therapy), we can conclude that the improvement cannot be explained simply by eye patching alone. We quantified the limits and the time course of visual plasticity induced by video-game experience. The recovery in visual acuity that we observed is at least 5-fold faster than would be expected from occlusion therapy in childhood amblyopia. We used positional noise and modelling to reveal the neural mechanisms underlying the visual improvements in terms of decreased spatial distortion (7%) and increased processing efficiency (33%). Our study had several limitations: small sample size, lack of randomization, and differences in numbers between groups. A large-scale randomized clinical study is needed to confirm the therapeutic value of video-game treatment in clinical situations. Nonetheless, taken as a pilot study, this work suggests that video-game play may provide important principles for treating amblyopia, and perhaps other cortical dysfunctions. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01223716.

BackgroundAfter idiopathic epiretinal membrane (iERM) removal, it is unclear whether the internal limiting membrane (ILM) should be removed. The objective was to assess if active ILM peeling after iERM removal could induce microscotomas.MethodsThe PEELING study is a national randomised clinical trial. When no spontaneous ILM peeling occurred, patients were randomised either to the ILM peeling or no ILM peeling group. Groups were compared at the month 1 (M1), M6 and M12 visits in terms of microperimetry, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography findings. The primary outcome was the difference in microscotoma number between baseline and M6.Results213 patients were included, 101 experienced spontaneous ILM peeling and 100 were randomised to the ILM peeling (n=51) or no ILM peeling group (n=49). The difference in microscotoma number between both groups was significant at M1 (3.9 more microscotomas in ILM peeling group, (0.8;7.0) p=0.0155) but not at M6 (2.1 more microscotomas in ILM peeling group (−0.5;4.7) p=0.1155). Only in the no ILM peeling group, the number of microscotomas significantly decreased and the mean retinal sensitivity significantly improved. The ERM recurred in nine patients in the no ILM peeling group (19.6%) versus zero in the ILM peeling group (p=0.0008): two of them underwent revision surgery. There was no difference in mean BCVA and microperimetry between patients experiencing or not a recurrence at M12.ConclusionSpontaneous ILM peeling is very common. Active ILM peeling prevents anatomical ERM recurrence but may induce retinal impairments and delay visual recovery.Trial Registration NCT02146144.

PurposeTo determine the efficacy of extended depth of focus (EDOF) contact lenses for controlling myopia progression in children through a 1-year randomised clinical trial.MethodsA total of 104 children aged 7–15 years, with spherical equivalent refraction ≤−0.50 D, were randomly assigned to wear SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses (n=48) or single vision spectacle lenses (n=56). Cycloplegic refraction with Shin-Nippon open field autorefractor and axial length with Lenstar LS 900 was determined at the baseline and 12-month visits. The compliance, visual discomfort and dryness questionnaires were administered during the final visit.ResultsSixty-nine children (control: n=38; treatment: 31) completed the 12-month follow-up visit, with no difference in baseline characteristics between the groups. Mean (SEM) myopia progression in the 12th month was −0.48±0.07D in the control group and −0.20±0.08D in the treatment group. Mean axial elongation was 0.22±0.03 mm and 0.11±0.03 mm in the control and treatment groups, respectively. SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses slowed myopia progression by 59% (−0.28D; p=0.01) based on spherical equivalent refraction and controlled axial length by 49% (0.11 mm; p=0.007) in comparison to single vision spectacle lenses. None of the participants reported any adverse effects. While most of the participants (82%) were comfortable with the contact lenses, 11% reported occasional dryness and 14% experienced mild fluctuations in visual acuity after immediate lens wear.ConclusionDaily wear of SEED 1 dayPure EDOF Mid contact lenses in Indian children showed a significant effect in controlling myopia progression and axial elongation.

Purpose To evaluate the tolerance to refractive errors of a new purely refractive extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL), TECNIS PureSee™ IOL, using preclinical and clinical metrics. Methods Preclinical evaluation included computer simulations of visual acuity (sVA) and dysphotopsia profile of different IOL designs (refractive EDF, diffractive EDF, multifocal, standard, and enhanced monofocals) using an appropriate eye model with and without ±0.50 D defocus and/or +0.75 D of astigmatism. Patients bilaterally implanted with a refractive EDF (Model ZEN00V, TECNIS PureSee™ IOL) or an enhanced monofocal (Model ICB00, TECNIS Eyhance™ IOL) IOL from a prospective, randomized study were included. At the 6-month postoperative visit, uncorrected and corrected distance vision (UDVA and CDVA), visual symptoms, satisfaction and dependency on glasses were evaluated in a subgroup of patients with absolute residual refractive error of >0.25 D in one or both eyes. Results In the presence of defocus and astigmatism, sVA was comparable for all except the multifocal IOL design. The refractive EDF was more tolerant to myopic outcomes and maintained a monofocal-like dysphotopsia profile with defocus. Binocular logMAR UDVA was −0.03 ± 0.08 for ZEN00V and −0.02 ± 0.11 for ICB00. 100% ZEN00V and 97% ICB00 patients did not need glasses and were satisfied with their distance vision. Monocular CDVA, contrast sensitivity and visual symptoms were also similar between both groups. Conclusions The clinical outcomes of the refractive EDF IOL demonstrated high quality distance vision and dysphotopsia comparable to a monofocal IOL, even in the presence of refractive error, thus matching the design expectations of the EDF IOL.