["Increasing occlusion" in the treatment of amblyopia with eccentric fixation]

Occlusion for stimulus deprivation amblyopia

BACKGROUND

Stimulus deprivation amblyopia (SDA) develops due to an obstruction to the passage of light secondary to a condition such as cataract. The obstruction prevents formation of a clear image on the retina. SDA can be resistant to treatment, leading to poor visual prognosis. SDA probably constitutes less than 3% of all amblyopia cases, although precise estimates of prevalence are unknown. In high-income countries, most people present under the age of one year; in low- to middle-income countries, people are likely to be older at the time of presentation. The mainstay of treatment is correction of the obstruction (e.g., removal of the cataract) and then occlusion of the better-seeing eye, but regimens vary, can be difficult to execute, and traditionally are believed to lead to disappointing results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of occlusion therapy for SDA in an attempt to establish realistic treatment outcomes and to examine evidence of any dose-response effect and assess the effect of the duration, severity, and causative factor on the size and direction of the treatment effect.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2018, Issue 12), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; and five other databases. We used no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches. We last searched the databases on 12 December 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials of participants with unilateral SDA with visual acuity worse than 0.2 LogMAR or equivalent. We specified no restrictions for inclusion based upon age, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, medication use, or the number of participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no trials that met the inclusion criteria specified in the protocol for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence from RCTs or quasi-randomized trials on the effectiveness of any treatment for SDA. RCTs are needed in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of occlusion, duration of treatment, level of vision that can be realistically achieved, effects of age at onset and magnitude of visual defect, optimum occlusion regimen, and factors associated with satisfactory and unsatisfactory outcomes with the use of various interventions for SDA.

Amblyopia with Eccentric Fixation: Is Inverse Occlusion Still an Option?

Purpose: To present a treatment protocol for patients with amblyopia and eccentric fixation who do not respond to conventional occlusion therapy.Material and methods: In this consecutive case series, 11 patients were included (age 3.5 to 5.0), all with mixed amblyopia and eccentric fixation, who had only minor improvement of their visual acuity (VA) despite good compliance with 6 hours/day to full time occlusion of the sound eye for at least 6 months. Visual acuity of amblyopic eyes ranged from 20/50 to 20/400 at the time of initiation of inverse occlusion. Total inverse occlusion of the amblyopic eye was prescribed for 4 to 8 weeks to convert the steady eccentric fixation to wandering fixation. No binocular viewing was allowed. Once the fixation became wandering, the sound eye was occluded day and night and in most patients, a red filter was placed before the amblyopic eye to stimulate foveal fixation. In nine patients, the fixation became central and occlusion of the sound eye was continued without red filter. All children continued full time occlusion until VA failed to improve after two consecutive visits despite good compliance.Results: In nine children, the VA improved to at least 20/32 in the amblyopic eye. The VA of the sound eye did not change.Conclusion: Inverse occlusion is still a valuable option if conventional occlusion appears to be insufficient to improve VA in amblyopic eyes with eccentric fixation. Full time inverse occlusion should be performed until the eccentric point is no longer used for fixation and should be followed with full time occlusion of the sound eye. Placing a red filter before the amblyopic eye may be helpful to stimulate foveal fixation.

Occlusion for stimulus deprivation amblyopia

BACKGROUND

Stimulus deprivation amblyopia (SDA) develops due to an obstruction to the passage of light secondary to a condition such as cataract. The obstruction prevents formation of a clear image on the retina. SDA can be resistant to treatment, leading to poor visual prognosis. SDA probably constitutes less than 3% of all amblyopia cases, although precise estimates of prevalence are unknown. In developed countries, most patients present under the age of one year; in less developed parts of the world patients are likely to be older at the time of presentation. The mainstay of treatment is removal of the cataract and then occlusion of the better-seeing eye, but regimens vary, can be difficult to execute, and traditionally are believed to lead to disappointing results.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of occlusion therapy for SDA in an attempt to establish realistic treatment outcomes. Where data were available, we also planned to examine evidence of any dose response effect and to assess the effect of the duration, severity, and causative factor on the size and direction of the treatment effect.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to October 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2013), the Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2013), PubMed (January 1946 to October 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com ), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 28 October 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of participants with unilateral SDA with visual acuity worse than 0.2 LogMAR or equivalent. We did not specify any restrictions for inclusion based upon age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities, medication use, or the number of participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study abstracts identified by the electronic searches.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any trials that met the inclusion criteria specified in the protocol for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence on the effectiveness of any treatment for SDA. Future randomized controlled trials are needed in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of occlusion, duration of treatment, level of vision that can be realistically achieved, effects of age at onset and magnitude of visual defect, optimum occlusion regimen, and factors associated with satisfactory and unsatisfactory outcomes with the use of various interventions for SDA.

Interventions for stimulus deprivation amblyopia

BACKGROUND

Stimulus deprivation amblyopia (SDA) develops due to an obstruction to the clear passage of light, preventing clear formation of an image on the retina for example, cataract, ptosis (droopy eyelid). It is particularly severe and can be resistant to treatment and the visual prognosis is often poor. Stimulus deprivation amblyopia is rare and precise estimates of prevalence difficult to come by; it probably constitutes less than 3% of all cases of amblyopia. In developed countries most patients present under the age of one; in less developed parts of the world presentation is likely to be significantly later than this.The mainstay of treatment is patching of the better-seeing eye but regimes vary, treatment is difficult to execute and results are often disappointing.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review were to evaluate the effectiveness of occlusion treatment for SDA, determine the optimum treatment regime and factors that may affect outcome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials - CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) on The Cochrane Library (2006, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1996 to April 2006), EMBASE (1980 to April 2006) and LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences) (to November 2004). There were no date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We aimed to include randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of subjects with unilateral SDA defined as worse than 0.2 LogMAR or equivalent. There were no restrictions with respect to age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities, medication use, and the number of participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study abstracts identified by the electronic searches.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is not possible to conclude how effective treatment for SDA is or which treatment regime produces the best results. There is a need for further study in this area.