Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Amblyopia Treatment & Management

  • Author: Kimberly G Yen, MD; Chief Editor: Hampton Roy, Sr, MD  more...
 
Updated: Apr 05, 2016
 

Medical Care

The clinician must first rule out an organic cause and treat any obstacle to vision (eg, cataract, occlusion of the eye from other etiologies).

Remove cataracts in the first 2 months of life, and aphakic correction must occur quickly.

Treatment of anisometropia and refractive errors must occur next.[10, 11, 12, 13] The amblyopic eye must have the most accurate optical correction possible. This should occur prior to any occlusion therapy because vision may improve with spectacles alone. This improvement is frequently seen in patients with unilateral refractive amblyopia.[14]

Full cycloplegic refraction should be given to patients with accommodative esotropia and amblyopia. In other patients, a prescription less than the full plus measurement that was refracted may be prescribed given that the decrease in plus is symmetric between the two eyes. Because accommodative amplitude is believed to be decreased in amblyopic eyes, one needs to be cautious about cutting back too much on the amount of plus. Refractive correction alone has been shown to improve amblyopia in up to one-fourth of patients in a nationwide trial.[15]

Patients with bilateral refractive amblyopia do well with spectacle correction alone, with most children aged 3-10 years achieving 20/25 or better within a year.[16, 17]

The next step is forcing the use of the amblyopic eye by occlusion therapy. Occlusion therapy has been the mainstay of treatment since the 18th century. The following are general guidelines for occlusion therapy:

  • Patching may be full-time or part-time. Standard teaching has been that children need to be observed at intervals of 1 week per year of age, if undergoing full-time occlusion to avoid occlusion amblyopia in the sound eye. The Amblyopia Treatment Studies (ATS) have helped to provide new information on the effect of various amounts of patching. [18, 19, 20]
  • Always consider lack of compliance in a child where visual acuity is not improving. Compliance is difficult to measure but is an important factor in determining the success of this therapy.
  • In addition to adhesive patches, opaque contact lenses, occluders mounted on spectacles, and adhesive tape on glasses have been used.
  • Establishing the fact that the vision of the better eye has been degraded sufficiently with the chosen therapy is important.
  • The Amblyopia Treatment Studies have helped to define the role of full-time patching versus part-time patching in patients with amblyopia. The studies have demonstrated that, in patients aged 3-7 years with severe amblyopia (visual acuity between 20/100 and 20/400), full-time patching produced a similar effect to that of 6 hours of patching per day. In a separate study, 2 hours of daily patching produced an improvement in visual acuity similar to that of 6 hours of daily patching when treating moderate amblyopia (visual acuity better than 20/100) in children aged 3-7 years. In this study, patching was prescribed in combination with 1 hour of near visual activities.
  • Data from the Amblyopia Treatment Studies are also available for older patients, although patients younger than 7 years are the most responsive to treatment. For patients aged 7-12 years, the Amblyopia Treatment Studies have suggested that prescribing 2-6 hours a day of patching can improve visual acuity even if the amblyopia has been previously treated. Among patients aged 13-17 years, prescribing 2-6 hours a day of patching improved vision in 47% of patients whose amblyopia had not been previously treated and improved vision in 25% of patients whose amblyopia had been previously treated with patching. [21]
  • The Amblyopia Treatment Studies have also found that about one fourth of children with amblyopia who were successfully treated experience a recurrence within the first year after discontinuation of treatment. Data from these studies suggest that patients treated with 6 or more hours a day of patching have a greater risk of recurrence when patching is stopped abruptly rather than when it is reduced to 2 hours a day prior to cessation of patching.

There is some evidence that having children wear an eye patch for 6 hours daily rather than 2 hours can yield greater improvement in visual acuity at 10 weeks.[22] The significantly greater improvement in visual acuity noted with the more intense patching protocol suggests that this strategy is worth considering in children with residual amblyopia. The results have the following implications:

  • If there is stable residual amblyopia after 12 weeks of 2-hour patching, an increase to 6-hour patching can bring about further improvement
  • If the goal is to achieve the best result in the shortest amount of time, it may be worthwhile to bypass 2-hour patching and start with 6-hour patching instead

In the past, penalization therapy was reserved for children who would not wear a patch or in whom compliance was an issue. The Amblyopia Treatment Studies, however, have demonstrated that atropine penalization in patients with moderate amblyopia (defined by the study as visual acuity better than 20/100) is as effective as patching. The Amblyopia Treatment Studies were performed in children aged 3-7 years.[23, 24, 25, 26]

The Amblyopia Treatment Studies have also demonstrated that weekend use of atropine provided an improvement in visual acuity similar to that of daily use of atropine when treating moderate amblyopia in children aged 3-7 years.

Atropine drops or ointment is instilled in the nonamblyopic eye. This therapy is sometimes used in conjunction with patching or occlusion of the glasses (eg, adhesive tape, nail polish) by individual practitioners. In the Amblyopia Treatment Studies that evaluated patching versus atropine penalization, atropine penalization and patching were used in conjunction with 1 hour of near visual activities.

This technique may also be used for maintenance therapy, which is useful, especially in patients with mild amblyopia.

Other options include optical blurring through contact lenses or elevated bifocal segments.[27]

In a prospective cohort study of 105 children who had previously participated in a randomized trial comparing atropine and patching for moderate amblyopia, researchers observed, after controlling for baseline refractive error, a decrease in amblyopic eye spherical equivalent refractive error to less hyperopia. This shift toward emmetropia was associated with ocular alignment, supporting the idea that better motor and sensory fusion promote emmetropization.[28]

The desired endpoint of therapy is spontaneous alternation of fixation or equal visual acuity in both eyes.[29] When visual acuity is stable, patching may be decreased slowly, depending on the child's tendency for the amblyopia to recur. There is no established standard for tapering the patching treatment. Because amblyopia recurs in a large number of patients (see Prognosis), maintenance therapy or tapering of therapy should be strongly considered. This tapering is controversial, so individual physicians vary in their approaches.

Even though there have been many advances in amblyopia treatment, tailoring the treatment with individual treatment plans is still difficult because the dose/effect response from the amount of occlusion is not fully understood.[14]

Treatment of strabismus generally occurs last. The endpoint of strabismic amblyopia is freely alternating fixation or equal vision. Surgery generally is performed when the endpoint has been reached.

Next

Surgical Care

Surgical therapy for strabismus generally should occur after amblyopia is reversed. Disadvantages to surgical therapy prior to correction of amblyopia include difficulty in telling if amblyopia is present because there is no longer a strabismus to assess fixation preference in nonverbal patients and higher potential to being lost to follow-up, as the child cosmetically looks better. The improved cosmesis gives the parents a false sense of security about the vision improving.

Previous
Next

Activity

Close supervision during occlusion therapy is necessary to make sure children do not peek. Various methods of preventing children from removing patches have been considered, from a reward system for older children to arm splints and mittens for infants.

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Kimberly G Yen, MD Associate Professor of Ophthalmology, Department of Ophthalmology, Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine

Kimberly G Yen, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

J James Rowsey, MD Former Director of Corneal Services, St Luke's Cataract and Laser Institute

J James Rowsey, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Medical Association, Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Florida Medical Association, Sigma Xi, Southern Medical Association, Pan-American Association of Ophthalmology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Hampton Roy, Sr, MD Associate Clinical Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

Hampton Roy, Sr, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Ophthalmology, American College of Surgeons, Pan-American Association of Ophthalmology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Gerhard W Cibis, MD Clinical Professor, Director of Pediatric Ophthalmology Service, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Kansas School of Medicine

Gerhard W Cibis, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Ophthalmological Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

The authors and editors of Medscape Reference gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Ryan I Huffman, MD, with the literature review and referencing for this article.

References
  1. Kushner, BJ. Amblyopia. Nelson LB, ed. Harley's Pediatric Ophthalmology. 1998. 125-39.

  2. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Amblyopia. In: Basic and Clinical Science Course: Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 1997: 259-65.

  3. Bruce A, Pacey IE, Bradbury JA, Scally AJ, Barrett BT. Bilateral Changes in Foveal Structure in Individuals with Amblyopia. Ophthalmology. 2012 Sep 29. [Medline].

  4. von Noorden GK. Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility: Theory and Management. 1996. 216-54.

  5. Lempert P. Retinal area and optic disc rim area in amblyopic, fellow, and normal hyperopic eyes: a hypothesis for decreased acuity in amblyopia. Ophthalmology. 2008 Dec. 115(12):2259-61. [Medline].

  6. Daw NW. Critical periods and amblyopia. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998 Apr. 116(4):502-5. [Medline].

  7. Kirschen DG. Understanding Sensory Evaluation. In: Rosenbaum AL, Santiago AP, eds. Clinical Strabismus Management: Principles and Practice. 1999: 22-35.

  8. McNamara D. Laser scanner tops comparison of preschool vision screens. Medscape Medical News. April 15, 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/782529. Accessed: April 22, 2013.

  9. Lin LK, Uzcategui N, Chang EL. Effect of surgical correction of congenital ptosis on amblyopia. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Nov-Dec. 24(6):434-6. [Medline].

  10. Flynn JT. Amblyopia: its treatment today and its portent for the future. Binocul Vis Strabismus Q. 2000 Summer. 15(2):109. [Medline].

  11. Flynn JT, Woodruff G, Thompson JR, et al. The therapy of amblyopia: an analysis comparing the results of amblyopia therapy utilizing two pooled data sets. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1999. 97:373-90; discussion 390-5. [Medline].

  12. Flynn JT. 17th annual Frank Costenbader Lecture. Amblyopia revisited. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1991 Jul-Aug. 28(4):183-201. [Medline].

  13. Brown SM. Verisyse IOL implantation in a child with anisometropic amblyopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008 Jul. 34(7):1057-8. [Medline].

  14. Taylor K, Powell C, Hatt SR, Stewart C. Interventions for unilateral and bilateral refractive amblyopia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Apr 18. 4:CD005137. [Medline].

  15. Writing Committee for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group, Cotter SA, Foster NC, Holmes JM, Melia BM, Wallace DK, et al. Optical treatment of strabismic and combined strabismic-anisometropic amblyopia. Ophthalmology. 2012 Jan. 119 (1):150-8. [Medline].

  16. Cotter SA, Edwards AR, Wallace DK, et al. Treatment of anisometropic amblyopia in children with refractive correction. Ophthalmology. 2006 Jun. 113(6):895-903. [Medline].

  17. Wallace DK, Chandler DL, Beck RW, et al. Treatment of bilateral refractive amblyopia in children three to less than 10 years of age. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Oct. 144(4):487-96. [Medline].

  18. Holmes JM, Repka MX, Kraker RT, Clarke MP. The treatment of amblyopia. Strabismus. 2006 Mar. 14 (1):37-42. [Medline].

  19. Holmes JM, Kraker RT, Beck RW, et al. A randomized trial of prescribed patching regimens for treatment of severe amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2003 Nov. 110(11):2075-87. [Medline].

  20. Repka MX, Beck RW, Holmes JM, et al. A randomized trial of patching regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003. 121:603-11. [Medline].

  21. Scheiman MM, Hertle RW, Beck RW, et al. Randomized trial of treatment of amblyopia in children aged 7 to 17 years. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005 Apr. 123(4):437-47. [Medline].

  22. McNamara D. More eye patch time speeds amblyopia correction. Medscape Medical News. April 22, 2013. [Full Text].

  23. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of atropine vs. patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002. 120:268-278. [Medline].

  24. Repka MX, Wallace DK, Beck RW, et al. Two-year follow-up of a 6-month randomized trial of atropine vs patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005. 123:149-157. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  25. Repka MX, Cotter SA, Beck RW, et al. A randomized trial of atropine regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2004. 111:2076-85. [Medline].

  26. Scheiman MM, Hertle RW, Kraker RT, et al. Patching vs atropine to treat amblyopia in children aged 7 to 12 years: a randomized trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008 Dec. 126(12):1634-42. [Medline].

  27. Collins RS, McChesney ME, McCluer CA, et al. Occlusion properties of prosthetic contact lenses for the treatment of amblyopia. J AAPOS. 2008 Dec. 12(6):565-8. [Medline].

  28. Kulp MT, Foster NC, Holmes JM, Kraker RT, Melia BM, Repka MX, et al. Effect of ocular alignment on emmetropization in children 1111Am J Ophthalmol</i>. 2012 Aug. 154(2):297-302.e1. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  29. Repka MX. How much amblyopia treatment is enough?. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008 Jul. 126(7):990-1. [Medline].

  30. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group, Repka MX, Kraker RT, Dean TW, Beck RW, Siatkowski RM, et al. A randomized trial of levodopa as treatment for residual amblyopia in older children. Opthalmology. 2015 May. 122(5):874-81. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.01.002. Epub 2015 Feb 9. [Medline].

  31. Levartovsky S, Oliver M, Gottesman N, Shimshoni M. Factors affecting long term results of successfully treated amblyopia: initial visual acuity and type of amblyopia. Br J Ophthalmol. 1995 Mar. 79(3):225-8. [Medline].

  32. Longmuir SQ, Pfeifer W, Leon A, Olson RJ, Short L, Scott WE. Nine-year results of a volunteer lay network photoscreening program of 147 809 children using a photoscreener in Iowa. Ophthalmology. 2010 Oct. 117(10):1869-75. [Medline].

  33. Mirabella G, Hay S, Wong AM. Deficits in perception of images of real-world scenes in patients with a history of amblyopia. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011 Feb. 129(2):176-83. [Medline].

  34. Holmes JM, Beck RW, Kraker RT, et al. Risk of amblyopia recurrence after cessation of treatment. J AAPOS. 2004. 8:420-8. [Medline].

  35. Helwick C. Portable vision screening devices find amblyopia in children. Medscape Medical News. October 27, 2013. [Full Text].

  36. Wallace DK, Edwards AR, Cotter SA, Beck RW, Arnold RW, Astle WF, et al. A randomized trial to evaluate 2 hours of daily patching for strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2006 Jun. 113(6):904-12. [Medline].

  37. Holmes JM, Lazar EL, Melia BM, Astle WF, Dagi LR, Donahue SP, et al. Effect of age on response to amblyopia treatment in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011 Nov. 129(11): 1451-7. doi: 10.001/archophthalmol. 2011.179. Epub 2011 Jul 11. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.