Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background and Objectives: Amblyopia is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by interocular suppression of visual input, affecting visual acuity, stereopsis, contrast sensitivity, and other visual functions. Conventional treatment comprises occlusion of the sound eye. In recent years, novel therapies that deploy perceptual learning (PL) principles have been introduced. The purpose of this study is to assess the latest scientific data on this topic. Materials and Methods: For this purpose, we conducted a literature search for relevant studies published during the previous 4 years (2020–2023). Results: A plethora of visual perceptual learning protocols have been recently developed. Dichoptic video games, contrast rebalanced movies, and online perceptual training platforms are the main formats. Perceptual learning activates neuroplasticity, overcomes interocular suppression, and improves the visual impairments induced by amblyopia. Conclusions: This novel treatment is effective in both children and adults, as well as in patients non-responding to patching.

BackgroundTraditional treatment of amblyopia involves either wearing a patch or atropine penalisation of the better eye. A new treatment is being developed on the basis of virtual reality technology allowing either DVD footage or computer games which present a common background to both eyes and the foreground, containing the imagery of interest, only to the amblyopic eye.MethodsA randomised control trial was performed on patients with amblyopia aged 4–8 years with three arms. All three arms had dichoptic stimulation using shutter glass technology. One arm had DVD footage shown to the amblyopic eye and common background to both, the second used a modified shooter game, Nux, with sprite and targets presented to the amblyopic eye (and background to both) while the third arm had both background and foreground presented to both eyes (non-interactive binocular treatment (non-I-BiT) games).ResultsSeventy-five patients were randomised; 67 were residual amblyopes and 70 had an associated strabismus. The visual acuity improved in all three arms by approximately 0.07 logMAR in the amblyopic eye at 6 weeks. There was no difference between I-BiT DVD and non-I-BiT games compared with I-BiT games (stated primary outcome) in terms of gain in vision.ConclusionsThere was a modest vision improvement in all three arms. Treatment was well tolerated and safe. There was no difference between the three treatments in terms of primary stated outcomes but treatment duration was short and the high proportion of previously treated amblyopia and strabismic amblyopia disadvantaged dichoptic stimulation treatment.Trial registration numberNCT01702727, results.

Purpose To assess the possible benefits of the use of perceptual learning and dichoptic therapy combined with patching in children with amblyopia over the use of only patching. Methods Quasi-experimental multicentric study including 52 amblyopic children. Patients who improved their visual acuity (VA) by combining spectacles and patching were included in patching group (PG: 20 subjects), whereas those that did not improved with patching performed visual training (perceptual learning + dichoptic therapy) combined with patching, being assigned to the visual treatment group (VT: 32 subjects). Changes in VA, contrast sensitivity (CS), and stereopsis were monitored during a 6-month follow-up in each group. Results Significant improvements in VA were found in both groups at 1 month ( p  < 0.01). The total improvement of VA was 0.18 ± 0.16 and 0.31 ± 0.35 logMAR in PG and VT groups, respectively ( p  = 0.317). The Wilcoxon effect size was slightly higher in VT (0.48 vs. 0.54) at 6 months. An enhancement in CS was observed in the amblyopic eye of the VT group for all spatial frequencies at 1 month ( p  < 0.001). Likewise, the binocular function score also increased significantly in VT group ( p  = 0.002). A prediction equation of VA improvement at 1 month in VT group was obtained by multiple linear regression analysis ( p  < 0.001, R 2  = 0.747). Conclusions A combined treatment of visual training and patching is effective for obtaining a predictable improvement of VA, CS, and binocularity in patching-resistant amblyopic children.

Background Amblyopia is the most common developmental vision disorder in children. The initial treatment consists of refractive correction. When insufficient, occlusion therapy may further improve visual acuity. However, the challenges and compliance issues associated with occlusion therapy may result in treatment failure and residual amblyopia. Virtual reality (VR) games developed to improve visual function have shown positive preliminary results. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of these games to improve vision, attention, and motor skills in patients with residual amblyopia and identify brain-related changes. We hypothesize that a VR-based training with the suggested ingredients (3D cues and rich feedback), combined with increasing the difficulty level and the use of various games in a home-based environment is crucial for treatment efficacy of vision recovery, and may be particularly effective in children. Methods The AMBER study is a randomized, cross-over, controlled trial designed to assess the effect of binocular stimulation (VR-based stereoptic serious games) in individuals with residual amblyopia ( n  = 30, 6–35 years of age), compared to refractive correction on vision, selective attention and motor control skills. Additionally, they will be compared to a control group of age-matched healthy individuals ( n  = 30) to account for the unique benefit of VR-based serious games. All participants will play serious games 30 min per day, 5 days per week, for 8 weeks. The games are delivered with the Vivid Vision Home software. The amblyopic cohort will receive both treatments in a randomized order according to the type of amblyopia, while the control group will only receive the VR-based stereoscopic serious games. The primary outcome is visual acuity in the amblyopic eye. Secondary outcomes include stereoacuity, functional vision, cortical visual responses, selective attention, and motor control. The outcomes will be measured before and after each treatment with 8-week follow-up. Discussion The VR-based games used in this study have been conceived to deliver binocular visual stimulation tailored to the individual visual needs of the patient, which will potentially result in improved basic and functional vision skills as well as visual attention and motor control skills. Trial registration This protocol is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05114252) and in the Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal (identifier: SNCTP000005024).

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.

PurposeThe treatment of unilateral amblyopia involves refractive adaptation, occlusion therapy or penalization with atropine drops. However, in recent years, the use of binocular digital therapy has shown promising results. Aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of binocular treatment of amblyopia compared with standard treatments or placebo therapy.MethodsThis systematic review was conducted in accordance to PRISMA statement. Electronic literature was thoroughly searched for articles published between 2013 and May 2024, in the following electronic database; Pubmed, CENTRAL, MedlinePlus, Medline Europe, PLOS, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov. The review comprised randomized control trials (RCTs) including patients with unilateral amblyopia, who received binocular therapy or standard amblyopia or placebo treatment for more than two weeks and who had visual acuity assessment pre- and post-treatment. Only articles written in English were included. Risk of bias was assessed with the Rob2 tool, while study quality was evaluated with the modified Jadad scale.ResultsTwenty RCTs, including 1769 patients, were incorporated into this systematic review. Twelve different types of binocular amblyopia treatments were identified and categorized into two main types. The first type involves the presentation of low-contrast images in the fellow eye, including stimuli presented only in the amblyopic eye. The second type combines this approach with complementary dichoptic deficits in the images presented to both eyes to encourage their simultaneous use.ConclusionBinocular amblyopia treatment has shown promising results in addressing unilateral anisometropic, strabismic or mixed type of amblyopia. Nevertheless, further randomized controlled trials are essential to establish the exact dosage, type and duration of binocular therapy as a standard component of amblyopia care.

Purpose To assess the effectiveness of combined use of stereoscopic 3D video movies and part-time patching in treating older amblyopic children with poor response or compliance to traditional patching treatments and comparing this combined treatment with patching alone. Methods Thirty-two children aged 5–12 years with amblyopia associated with anisometropia, strabismus, or both were recruited in a randomized clinical trial. Eligible participants were assigned randomly to the combined and patching groups. Here, binocular treatment refers to using the Bangerter filter to blur the fellow eye and subsequently watching a close-up 3D movie with large parallax. The primary outcome was amblyopic eye (AE) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improvement at six weeks. In addition, secondary outcomes included BCVA of AE improvement at three weeks and change of stereoacuity. Results Of 32 participants, mean (SD) age was 6.63 (1.46) years, and 19 (59%) were female. At 6 weeks, mean (SD) amblyopic eye VA improved by 0.17 ± 0.08 logMAR (2-sided 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.22; F  = 57.2, p  < 0.01) and 0.05 ± 0.04 logMAR (2-sided 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.09; F  = 8.73, p  = 0.01) in the combined and patching groups, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (mean difference, 0.13 logMAR [1.3 line]; 95% CI, 0.08–0.17 logMAR [0.8–1.7 lines]; t 25 = 5.65, p  < 0 .01). After treatment, only the combined group had significantly improved stereoacuity, such as binocular function score (median [interquartile range], 2.30 [2.23 to 2.68] vs. 1.69 [1.60 to 2.30] log arcsec; paired, z  = –3.53, p  < 0.01), and mean stereoacuity gain was 0.47 log arcsec (± 0.22). Changes in other types of stereoacuity were similar. Conclusion Our laboratory-based binocular treatment strategy engaged a high level of compliance that led to a substantial gain in visual function after a short period of treatment for older amblyopic children having poor response or compliance to traditional patching treatments. Notably, the improving stereoacuity showed a greater advantage.

Acute acquired comitant esotropia (AACE) once considered rare, is now becoming more prevalent. Surgery in these cases can get delayed when the strabismus angle varies or if the patient is unwilling. In such cases optical management and vision therapy can be considered. We present the outcomes of such management for AACE. This retrospective study included a cohort of patients diagnosed with non-accommodative or non-neurological AACE, managed in our institute between January to October, 2023. Prisms were prescribed to patients experiencing constant double vision. All patients were given vision therapy exercises. Eso deviation and divergence range were measured pre and post therapy. Fourteen patients were included. Of these, 5 patients (with eso deviation ≤20PD) were relieved with vision therapy exercises alone. For the remaining 9 patients, prisms were prescribed along with vision therapy. Post-vision therapy, 2 patients could achieve binocular single vision without prisms, and in 4 patients the prism power was reduced. In the remaining 3, full prism correction was warranted, one of them opted for surgery. The median reduction in eso deviation by 6.5PD (range:2-25PD) and increase in divergence by 7PD (range:0-17PD) after vision therapy was significant (p < 0.03). Non-surgical intervention reduced the eso deviation in 79% (11/14) of patients. Certain types of AACE seem to be amenable to vision therapy and/or optical management. Temporary Fresnel prisms can be considered in majority of these patients and tapered away later, if their divergence range can be improved with vision therapy.

Contrast-rebalanced dichoptic movies have been shown to be an effective binocular treatment for amblyopia in the laboratory. Yet, at-home therapy is a more practical approach. In a randomized clinical trial, we compared dichoptic movies, streamed at-home on a handheld 3D-enabled game console, versus patching as amblyopia treatment. Sixty-five amblyopic children (3–7 years; 20/32–125) were randomly assigned to one of two parallel arms, binocular treatment (3 movies/week) or patching (14 h/week). The primary outcome, change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at the 2-week visit was completed by 28 and 30, respectively. After the primary outcome, both groups of children had the option to complete up to 6 weeks of binocular treatment. At the 2-week primary outcome visit, BCVA had improved in the movie (0.07 ± 0.02 logMAR; p  < .001) and patching (0.06 ± 0.01 logMAR; p  < 0.001) groups. There was no significant difference between groups (CI 95 %: − 0.02 to 0.04; p  = .48). Visual acuity improved in both groups with binocular treatment up to 6 weeks (0.15 and 0.18 logMAR improvement, respectively). This novel, at-home, binocular movie treatment improved amblyopic eye BCVA after 2 weeks (similar to patching), with additional improvement up to 6 weeks. Repeated binocular visual experience with contrast-rebalanced binocular movies provides an additional treatment option for amblyopia. Clincaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03825107 (31/01/2019).

PurposeTo evaluate the binocular and accommodative function in children wearing dual focus (DF) MiSight® contact lenses (CLs) for myopia control compared with children wearing single-vision (SV) spectacles.MethodsThis was a randomized, controlled clinical trial involving subjects aged 8 to 12, with myopia ranging from − 0.75 to − 4.00D and astigmatism < 1.00D, allocated to MiSight® study CLs group or control group wearing SV. Binocular and accommodative function was determined at baseline, 12-, and 24-month visits, assessed by the following sequence of tests: distance and near horizontal phoria, accommodative convergence/accommodation (AC/A) ratio, stereopsis, accommodative amplitude (AA), and accommodative response (AR) at 33, 25 and 20 cm.ResultsSeventy-four children completed the study: 41 in the CL group and 33 in the SV group. CLs group did not show any significant differences in binocular and accommodative measurements throughout the study. In control group, distance and near phoria, stereopsis, AC/A and AR at 20 cm did not show any significant change, but AA, AR at 33 cm and AR at 25 cm were greater at 24-month visit compared with baseline (p < 0.05).ConclusionsDF lenses do not change the binocular and accommodative function in children wearing dual focus CLs.Trial registrationNCT01917110