PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlation between the degree of anisometropia with depth of amblyopia and presence of stereopsis. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 119 patients treated during 1995-2004 was carried out. All patients had undergone a full ophthalmological examination. Inclusion criteria were: anisometropia >1 diopter (spherical and/or cylindrical), age at first examination between 2 and 8 years, no previous optical correction, absence of ocular and neurological disorders, absence of ocular motility disorders, and minimum follow-up of 2 years (mean 7.9 +/- 4.3). Optical correction was prescribed at first visit and, at a second visit, the need for patching or penalization was evaluated. RESULTS: The results show a correlation between the degree of anisometropia and visual acuity at first visit (p < 0.001). There were, however, several subjects with good levels of visual acuity despite considerable anisometropia, and also subjects where mild or moderate anisometropia was sufficient to induce a severe amblyopia. Compared to other types of anisometropia, anisomyopic patients appeared to have a higher degree of binocular vision recovery when corrected optically. First evaluation with the presence of good stereoacuity seems to be a prognostic indicator for amblyopic recovery. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the difficulty of developing a guideline for screening and treatment of anisometropia. Even though there seems to be a correlation between type and degree of anisometropia in a majority of patients, there is also a significant number of cases that do not follow this pattern. Another important observation is the presence of binocular vision at the first evaluation as a good prognostic indicator for visual recovery with optical correction alone, even without penalization therapy.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlation between the degree of anisometropia with depth of amblyopia and presence of stereopsis. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 119 patients treated during 1995-2004 was carried out. All patients had undergone a full ophthalmological examination. Inclusion criteria were: anisometropia >1 diopter (spherical and/or cylindrical), age at first examination between 2 and 8 years, no previous optical correction, absence of ocular and neurological disorders, absence of ocular motility disorders, and minimum follow-up of 2 years (mean 7.9 +/- 4.3). Optical correction was prescribed at first visit and, at a second visit, the need for patching or penalization was evaluated. RESULTS: The results show a correlation between the degree of anisometropia and visual acuity at first visit (p < 0.001). There were, however, several subjects with good levels of visual acuity despite considerable anisometropia, and also subjects where mild or moderate anisometropia was sufficient to induce a severe amblyopia. Compared to other types of anisometropia, anisomyopic patients appeared to have a higher degree of binocular vision recovery when corrected optically. First evaluation with the presence of good stereoacuity seems to be a prognostic indicator for amblyopic recovery. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the difficulty of developing a guideline for screening and treatment of anisometropia. Even though there seems to be a correlation between type and degree of anisometropia in a majority of patients, there is also a significant number of cases that do not follow this pattern. Another important observation is the presence of binocular vision at the first evaluation as a good prognostic indicator for visual recovery with optical correction alone, even without penalization therapy.
Authors: Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo; Herbert C Goltz; Manokaraananthan Chandrakumar; Zahra A Hirji; Agnes M F Wong Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2010-07-29 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo; Herbert C Goltz; Manokaraananthan Chandrakumar; Zahra Hirji; J Douglas Crawford; Agnes M F Wong Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: David K Wallace; Elizabeth L Lazar; Michele Melia; Eileen E Birch; Jonathan M Holmes; Kristine B Hopkins; Raymond T Kraker; Marjean T Kulp; Yi Pang; Michael X Repka; Susanna M Tamkins; Katherine K Weise Journal: J AAPOS Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 1.220
Authors: Kristina Tarczy-Hornoch; Rohit Varma; Susan A Cotter; Roberta McKean-Cowdin; Jesse H Lin; Mark S Borchert; Mina Torres; Ge Wen; Stanley P Azen; James M Tielsch; David S Friedman; Michael X Repka; Joanne Katz; Josephine Ibironke; Lydia Giordano Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2011-08-19 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Velma Dobson; Joseph M Miller; Candice E Clifford-Donaldson; Erin M Harvey Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-06-06 Impact factor: 4.799