Search

Purpose: To review home- and office-based vergence and accommodative therapies for treatment of convergence insufficiency (CI) in children and young adults up to 35 years of age., Methods: Literature searches were conducted through October 2020 in the PubMed database for English-language studies. The combined searches yielded 359 abstracts, of which 37 were reviewed in full text. Twelve of these were considered appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist., Results: Of the 12 studies included in this assessment, 8 were graded as level I evidence, 2 were graded as level II evidence, and 2 were graded as level III evidence. Two of the level I studies included older teenagers and young adults; the remainder of the studies exclusively evaluated children. Two randomized controlled trials found that office-based vergence and accommodative therapies were effective in improving motor outcomes in children with symptomatic CI. However, the studies reported conflicting results on the efficacy of office-based therapy for treating symptoms of CI. Data were inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of home-based therapies (including pencil push-ups and home computer therapy) compared with home placebo. In young adults, office-based vergence and accommodative therapies were not superior to placebo in relieving symptoms of CI., Conclusions: Level I evidence suggests that office-based vergence and accommodative therapies improve motor outcomes in children with symptomatic CI, although data are inconsistent regarding symptomatic relief. Evidence is insufficient to determine whether home-based therapies are effective., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Ophthalmology. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the available evidence comparing the effectiveness of extraocular muscle botulinum toxin type A (BTXA) injection with eye muscle surgery for restoring ocular alignment in children and adults with nonparalytic, nonrestrictive horizontal strabismus., Methods: Literature searches in the PubMed Cochrane Library, and clinical trial databases with no date restrictions, but limited to articles published in English, were conducted last on January 10, 2021. The searches yielded 515 citations, 40 of which were reviewed in full text by the first author. Fourteen articles met the criteria for inclusion (randomized or nonrandomized comparative studies, or case series with a minimum 50 patients; evaluating extraocular muscle BTXA injection for initial or repeat treatment of horizontal, nonparalytic, nonrestrictive strabismus; with at least 6 months of follow-up) and were graded by a methodologist., Results: The 14 included studies consisted of 2 randomized clinical trials, 3 nonrandomized comparative studies, and 9 case series. All 5 comparative studies were graded level II evidence, and the 9 case series were graded level III evidence. Successful motor outcomes after BTXA injection were relatively consistent across 4 of the 5 comparative studies at 60%, when adjustment was made for differential selection bias in 1 of the studies. In the 4 studies, successful motor outcomes after surgery ranged from 66% to 77% with a mean follow-up of 23 to 75 months, and the outcomes were not significantly different from those after BTXA injection. In the fifth level II study, success was significantly higher with BTXA injection than with surgery (94% vs. 72%). The level III BTXA case series demonstrated higher motor success rates of 87% to 89% when children were treated in 2 muscles at a time; rates were lower in adults treated with single-muscle BTXA injection., Conclusions: Extraocular muscle injection of BTXA achieves a high rate of successful motor alignment, comparable with that achieved after eye muscle surgery for nonparalytic, nonrestrictive horizontal strabismus. Good alignment may require multiple BTXA injections, and it is not yet clear whether sensory outcomes are equivalent for BTXA injections versus eye muscle surgery in young children., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Ophthalmology. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the published literature assessing the efficacy and safety of in-office probing compared with facility-based probing to treat congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO)., Methods: Literature searches were conducted in March 2020 in the PubMed database with no date restrictions and limited to studies published in English and in the Cochrane Library database with no restrictions. The combined searches yielded 281 citations. Of these, 21 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. Four articles were rated level I, 2 articles were rated level II, and 15 articles were rated level III., Results: Treatments consisted of observation, in-office nasolacrimal probing, or facility-based nasolacrimal probing. Success rates and complications or recurrences were recorded from 1 week to 6 months after surgery. Complete resolution of symptoms after surgery ranged from 66% to 95.6% for office-based procedures versus 50% to 97.7% for facility-based procedures. Level I evidence indicated that 66% of cases spontaneously resolved after 6 months of observation in infants between 6 and 10 months of age. Success rates for in-office probing were lower for bilateral than for unilateral NLDO (67% vs. 82%), whereas success rates were high in both unilateral (83%) and bilateral (82%) patients who underwent facility-based probing after 6 months of observation. Cost data did not indicate a definitive cost savings of either treatment method ($562 for in-office vs. $701 for facility-based, depending on cost models predicting spontaneous resolution rates at different ages). No serious adverse events with treatment or anesthesia were reported for either treatment method., Conclusions: Evidence supports the efficacy and safety of both in-office and facility-based surgery for congenital NLDO. However, treating bilateral NLDO in a facility setting may be better. Because a significant percentage of children achieved resolution spontaneously before 12 months of age, deferring treatment until 12 to 18 months of age is a reasonable option. Additional research may address symptom burden on families and the impact of anesthesia and emotional trauma of nonsedated office probings on patients and may explore further the cost of treatment for each treatment method., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the published literature on the accuracy of ophthalmic imaging methods to differentiate between papilledema and pseudopapilledema in children., Methods: Literature searches were conducted in January 2020 in the PubMed database for English-language studies with no date restrictions and in the Cochrane Library database without any restrictions. The combined searches yielded 354 abstracts, of which 17 were reviewed in full text. Six of these were considered appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. All 6 included studies were rated as level III evidence., Results: Fluorescein angiography, a combination of 2 OCT protocols, and multicolor confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (Spectralis SD-OCT; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) demonstrated the highest positive percent agreement (92%-100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69%-100%) and negative percent agreement (92%-100%; 95% CI, 70%-100%) with a clinical diagnosis of papilledema in children. However, results must be interpreted with caution owing to methodologic limitations, including a small sample size leading to wide CIs and an overall lack of data (there was only 1 study each for the above methods and protocols). Ultrasonographic measures showed either a high positive percent agreement (up to 95%) with low negative percent agreement (as low as 58%) or vice versa. Autofluorescence and fundus photography showed a lower positive (40%-60%) and negative (57%) percent agreement., Conclusions: Although several imaging methods demonstrated high positive and negative percent agreement with clinical diagnosis, no ophthalmic imaging method conclusively differentiated papilledema from pseudopapilledema in children because of the lack of high-quality evidence. Clinicians must continue to conduct thorough history-taking and examination and make judicious use of ancillary testing to determine which children warrant further workup for papilledema., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the accuracy of autorefraction compared with cycloplegic retinoscopy in children., Methods: Literature searches were last conducted in October 2019 in the PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases for studies published in English. The combined searches yielded 118 citations, of which 53 were reviewed in full text. Of these, 31 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and subsequently assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologists. Four articles were rated level I, 11 were rated level II, and 16 were rated level III articles. The 16 level III articles were excluded from this review., Results: Thirteen of the 15 studies comparing cycloplegic autorefraction with cycloplegic retinoscopy found a mean difference in spherical equivalent or sphere of less than 0.5 diopters (D); most were less than 0.25 D. Even lower mean differences were found when evaluating the cylindrical component of cycloplegic autorefraction versus cycloplegic retinoscopy. Despite low mean variability, there was significant individual measurement variability; the 95% limits of agreement were wide and included clinically relevant differences. Comparisons of noncycloplegic with cycloplegic autorefractions found that noncyloplegic refraction tends to over minus by 1 to 2 D., Conclusions: Cycloplegic autorefraction is appropriate to use in pediatric population-based studies. Cycloplegic retinoscopy can be valuable in individual clinical cases to confirm the accuracy of cycloplegic autorefraction, particularly when corrected visual acuity is worse than expected or the autorefraction results are not consistent with expected findings., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the published literature to assess the visual outcomes and adverse events associated with the 2 most commonly used contact lenses for treating aphakia in children: silicone elastomer (SE) and rigid gas permeable (RGP)., Methods: Literature searches were last conducted in January 2018 in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases with no date or language restrictions. These combined searches yielded 167 citations, 27 of which were reviewed in full text. Of these, 10 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and subsequently assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist., Results: The literature search identified 4 level II studies and 6 level III studies. There were insufficient data to compare visual outcomes for eyes treated using SE lenses versus RGP lenses. Silicone elastomer lenses have the advantage that they can be worn on an extended-wear basis, but they were associated with more adverse events than RGP lenses. These adverse events included microbial keratitis, corneal infiltrates, corneal edema, corneal scars, lenses adhering to the cornea, superficial punctate keratopathy, lid swelling, and conjunctival hyperemia. The lens replacement rate was approximately 50% higher for RGP lenses in the only study that directly compared SE and RGP lenses., Conclusions: Limited evidence was found in the literature on this topic. Silicone elastomer and RGP contact lenses were found to be effective for treating aphakia in children. Silicone elastomer lenses are easier to fit and may be worn on an extended-wear basis. Rigid gas permeable lenses must be removed every night and require a more customized fit, but they are associated with fewer adverse events. The choice of which lens a practitioner prescribes should be based on the particular needs of each patient., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To review the scientific literature that evaluates the effectiveness of adjustable sutures in the management of strabismus for adult and pediatric patients. Literature searches were performed in the PubMed database through April 2021 with no date limitations and were restricted to publications in English. The searches identified 551 relevant citations, of which 55 were reviewed in full text. Of these, 17 articles met the inclusion criteria and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. The search included all randomized controlled studies regardless of study size and cohort studies of 100 or more patients comparing the adjustable versus nonadjustable suture technique, with a focus on motor alignment outcomes or reoperation rates. The literature search yielded no level I studies. Of the 17 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 11 were rated level II and 6 were rated level III. Among the 12 studies that focused on motor alignment outcomes, 4 small randomized clinical trials (RCTs) did not find a statistically significant difference between groups, although they were powered to detect only very large differences. Seven of 8 nonrandomized studies found a statistically significant difference in motor alignment success in favor of the adjustable suture technique, both overall and in certain subgroups of patients. Successful motor alignment was seen in both exotropia (in 3 studies that were not limited to children) and esotropia (in 1 study of adults and 2 of children). The majority of included studies that reported on reoperation rates found the rates to be lower in patients who underwent strabismus surgery with adjustable sutures, but this finding was not uniformly demonstrated. Although there are no level I studies evaluating the effectiveness of adjustable sutures for strabismus surgery, the majority of nonrandomized studies that met the inclusion criteria for this assessment reported an advantage of the adjustable suture technique over the nonadjustable technique with respect to motor alignment outcomes. This finding was not uniformly demonstrated among all studies reviewed and warrants further investigation in the development and analysis of adjustable suture techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To review the published literature assessing the efficacy of binocular therapy for the treatment of amblyopia compared with standard treatments. Literature searches with no date restrictions and limited to the English language were conducted in January 2018 and updated in April 2019 in the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library database with no restrictions. The search yielded 286 citations, and the full text of 50 articles was reviewed. Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria for this assessment and were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. Six studies were rated level I, 1 study was rated level II, and 13 studies were rated level III because of the impact on the development and popularization of this technology. Two of the level I and II studies reviewed described a significant improvement in visual acuity in the binocular group versus standard patching standard treatment (the total number of patients in these 2 studies was 147). However, the 5 studies that failed to show a visual improvement from binocular therapy compared with standard treatments were larger and more rigorously designed (the total number of patients in these 5 studies was 813). Level I and II studies also failed to show a significant improvement over baseline in sensory status, including depth of suppression and stereopsis of those treated with binocular therapy. Several smaller level III case series (total number of patients in these 13 studies was 163) revealed more promising results than the binocular treatments studied in the level I and II studies, especially using treatments that are more engaging and are associated with better compliance. There is no level I evidence to support the use of binocular treatment as a substitute for current therapies for amblyopia (including patching and optical treatment). Furthermore, 2 large randomized controlled trials showed inferior performance compared with standard patching treatment. On the basis of this review of the published literature, binocular therapy cannot be recommended as a replacement for standard amblyopia therapy. However, more research is needed to determine the potential benefits of proposed binocular treatments in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To compare the visual outcomes and adverse events associated with optical correction using an intraocular lens (IOL), contact lenses, or spectacles after cataract surgery in children 2 years of age or younger. Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the databases of clinical trials in February 2019, without date or language restrictions. The search resulted in 194 potentially relevant citations, and 34 were selected for full-text review. Fourteen studies were determined to be relevant to the assessment criteria and were selected for inclusion in this assessment. The panel methodologist then assigned a level of evidence rating to these studies. Intraocular lenses were associated with visual outcomes similar to outcomes for contact lenses or spectacles for children who had both bilateral and unilateral cataracts. Intraocular lenses were also associated with an increased risk of visual axis opacities. All treatments were associated with a similar incidence of glaucoma. Although ocular growth was similar for all treatments, infants younger than 6 months who underwent IOL implantation had large myopic shifts that often resulted in high myopia or severe anisometropia later in childhood. Corneal endothelial cell counts were lower in eyes that underwent IOL implantation. The incidence of strabismus was similar with all treatments. Intraocular lens implantation is not recommended for children 6 months of age or younger because there is a higher incidence of visual axis opacities with this treatment compared with aphakia. The best available evidence suggests that IOL implantation can be done safely with acceptable side effects in children older than 6 months of age. However, the unpredictability of ocular growth means that these children will often have large refractive errors later in childhood that may necessitate an IOL exchange or wearing spectacles or contact lenses with a large refractive correction. In addition, the training and experience of the surgeon as well as ocular and systemic comorbidities should be taken into consideration when deciding whether IOL implantation would be appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]